Typically when all is said and done they are categorized as delicious or not delicious. If you practice good sanitation and work hard at hitting your numbers(which really isnt hard and Im sure you’ll have no major problem) yours will fall under the delicious category!
I dont know if youve tried New Belgium’s Snow Day, but they use a lot of Centennial in that and its freaking awesome. At least in my opinion.
[quote=“Adam20”]Typically when all is said and done they are categorized as delicious or not delicious.[/quote]lol! I’m becoming vaguely interested in entering a competition. I suppose if I do I can brew a recipe, then read the BJCP style guidelines and see which description is closest.
And, yeah, I’ve had Snow Day. I’m not a huge hop-head, so I don’t drink it much, but I may go buy some now that I know that.
Haha entering a comp is a good idea for getting good critiques. Just brew something that you are pretty sure is in a certain set of guidelines and enter it. You’ll get things like “this is a little too hoppy for style” or things like that. itll give you a really nice idea of how close you are and where to take your beers direction wise.
Hrm…for a beer that is neither here nor there, it might be interesting to enter the same batch under a few different styles that are a relatively close fit and see how things shake out in each case.
For custom recipes, in theory I’m not nearly as interested in producing certain styles (there are kits and existing recipes for that) as I am in producing certain character profiles, balances, etc. Of course, we’ll see if I still feel that way after tasting what this recipe produces. 
All that said, I suspect I’ll turn out an amber ale with this one, maybe with a little character.
Ah ok. Yeah. I see your point. Ive got a beer in secondary like that right now. Its grain/hop bill is closest to an American Brown and has oats, but I used a lager yeast cause it was what I had on hand. Its lagering now and its kind of a “fingers crossed” recipe.
Based on the American Amber description in the BJCP Guide
http://www.bjcp.org/docs/2008_stylebook.pdf
, and assuming the Beer Calculus estimates are on (14 SRM, 39 IBU, balanced, 6% ABV), this will be an American Amber in all respects, unless the chocolate character is strong:
“Should not have a strong chocolate or roast character that might suggest an
American brown ale (although small amounts are OK)”
There’s also a “Specialty Beer” category for beers that don’t really fit in anywhere else.
Oh yeah, I also wanted to ask about steeping grains.
My plan has been to mash all the grains in this recipe, but it just dawned on me that maybe I should consider steeping at least the chocolate malt? Or, is that just an extract technique?
Im pretty sure thats just a technique for when youre doing a partial grain recipe. Meaning the majority of the recipe is extract except for grains that must be mashed like rye. Just mash the chocolate with the rest of the grains. You’ll turn out a nice product I think.
OK, that’s what I figured, but thought I’d ask just in case.
Thanks again!
You bet! I hope it goes well for you.
[quote=“ickyfoot”]My plan has been to mash all the grains in this recipe, but it just dawned on me that maybe I should consider steeping at least the chocolate malt?[/quote]You can steep if you wish, and you won’t have to add bicarbonate to the mash to raise the pH. Are you trying to get chocolate flavor from the grain or just color?
I’d like the flavor to be there, which I’m guessing means I should mash it.
What are the chances that water additions at levels I’m talking about will negatively-affect taste?
.4g each gypsum and epsom
1.4 grams of baking soda
1.25 grams of chalk
I split the additions between the two options in both cases to keep all addition levels as low as possible. But, if you/anyone thinks that’s likely to cause off-flavors, maybe I’ll split the chocolate between mashing and steeping, or just steep it (mostly for body, not too worried about color).
For flavor, you can mash or steep. Mashing means you’ll get more sugar out of it, though. And chocolate doesn’t add “body” for me - unfermentable carbohydrates from crystal malt or oats, or rye (malted or flaked), or a higher-temp mash will all add body (or the perception of body). Chocolate adds roast and some “dryness” and bitter components.
For your salts, there’s really no benefit from using epsom for sulfate or baking soda for bicarbonate, so I would stick with gypsum and chalk and keep it simple.
So, in terms of flavor, is it pretty much a wash when it comes to mashing vs. steeping, aside from maybe sweetness/dryness? This is mostly just curiosity. I’m just gonna mash everything this time.
Sounds good re: the salts. Sorry to keep harping on the amounts, but do my addition amounts sound crazy high or anything? Should I go with 1/4 gram increments or is that too little for 3 gallons of mash? I just don’t wanna overshoot, as you mentioned earlier.
Having only steeped crystal as part of a partigyle routine, I can only say that IME steeping imparts the same flavor as mashing.
With salts, a minimalist approach is best, and I don’t think your amounts are crazy. Use half of what you calculated, check the pH, then add more if needed.
Cool, thanks again. At this point I’m pretty comfortable with everything about the AG process (in theory) except water adjustments. Of course, that probably means that’s the only thing I’ll get right
:cheers:
OK, I think I pulled it off! Got mash pH to around 5.0, maybe 5.1 using colorpHast, which based on Kai’s site means 5.3 - 5.4. Mash temp was high at first, but got it to 153. Dropped about 8 degrees in about 40 minutes (at least in part because of chalk additions), so I added a quart of boiling water and was back up to 149 or so.
Sweet wort gravity was 1.042 w/ ~6.5 gallons, making about 68% efficiency.
Ended up with just over 5 gallons of wort with an OG of 1.055, which is fairly close to my target (1.060). The wort tastes exactly how I’ve come to expect wort to taste.
I’m quite pleased with how everything went. Next time, I’ll focus on keeping temps steady, which will hopefully increase effeciency.
Many thanks to everyone, especially Shadetree, for all the help and feedback. Here’s hoping the results are as good as the process!
:cheers:
thats an awful lot of chocolate malt
A pound or a half pound (I reduced it to a half pound after some feedback)?
It does seem a lot darker than the 14 SRM predicted by beer calculus. But, color isn’t a huge concern this round. Just disaster avoidance during mashing and drink-ability.
OK, I brewed a new batch of beer last night, and while I had the beer thief out, I thought I’d steal a sample from this recipe, even though it’s only a week into primary.
a) 1450 has brought it from 1.055 to 1.016, which is exactly in range of the FG I was going for (~1.015). Awesome!
b) Obviously it’s still very young, but based on my various tastings of very young beers (1 - 2 weeks in primary) over the past couple of months, I think it will turn into a very drinkable light brown ale. We shall see, but I’m tentatively excited!
c) I thought I detected a very subtle sulfur-y aroma/flavor right up front, but my wife didn’t notice anything along those lines. Any thoughts about whether I can expect it to mellow, increase, or remain unchanged over time, assuming it wasn’t just in my head?
