[quote=“mabrungard”][quote=“Ken Lenard”]Right. We all know that we don’t operate in a box so sometimes you make something off-the-map and it’s all good. I occasionally make a “clean out the closet” kind of beer that has 2 ounces of this, 4 ounces of that 1.5 pounds of this, etc. and it makes great beer. But most of my beers are straightforward.
I find it hilarious that Martin the water guy looks past my point on water. I will also give big ups to Martin for all of the personal help he has given me on water. But this issue I had with bicarb was really getting in the way of my beers. Maybe I’m just over-sensitive to it or something, I don’t know. But I like some of the more delicate and finesse styles and the bicarb was enemy #1 one for those beers. Cheers Beerheads.[/quote]
Well in retrospect, you have a point Ken. My initial take is that there are people that happen to have great water for certain styles, right out of their tap. So I was less inclined to say that all brewers have to be fanatic about their water condition. Thus my initial dismissal of #4.
Any water is likely to be able to make beer…maybe even good beer. However, you are correct that the water really does have to be right for the style to create ‘great’ beer. The term ‘right’ has some leeway when it comes to flavor ions. However, the right level of residual alkalinity is fairly narrow. For many brewers, bicarbonate is the water component that is most likely to screw up their beer.[/quote]
Totally agree with you. Martin, you knew I was just playfully jabbing earlier. I wanted to mention water and also mention that futzing with it may not apply to everyone. I talk with people all over who have soft water (all ppms are 10 or under) and I would love to have that water. But those people may have an issue if they’re not dialed into their water and they want to make stouts, IPAs, bitters, etc. They will wonder why their hoppy or dark beers don’t have that pop. So instead of diluting, they will have to make additions but they still need to know their water and understand what to do with it. I would say that on a scale from 1 to 10, my water understanding is around a 2 or 3. :lol: That’s up from zero. But I understand what changes I need to make for the various styles I brew and the improvement has been outstanding. Cheers gang.
Ken, I knew it! When I read the first line of this post I knew it would eventually become a water thread.
I agree with you all around the biggest improvements I noticed in my brews came from proper temp control, proper pitching rates, and adequate aging for given style.
I’ve been satisfied enough with my beers that I haven’t had to mess with my water too much, but that’s on the horizon for the next step.
[quote=“bdaugherty”]Ken, I knew it! When I read the first line of this post I knew it would eventually become a water thread.
[/quote]
Guilty as charged but I would like to think that only 20% of it is a water thread.
Sorry, but I’ve gotta disagree. I make what I think is really good beer, incuding a great “clone” of Rochefort. But in no way is it the same, better, or even close to as good.[/quote]
As far as making a Rochefort maybe not but pick your favorite IPA then yes Denny’ do I dare say Its possible, It is.[/quote]
I’ve made LOTS of IPA…likely hundreds. I agree that it’s possible to make better than SOME commercial IPAs, but there are a lot I couldn’t touch.[/quote]
I need to send you some of my beers. The Wooky Jack clone is spot on and even better. FWIW.
Along with a simple ESB that’s better than aged Fullers. Yes we can at least make a beer that’s just as good or even better. Freshness helps a lot, among other things. Cheers to all.
[quote=“wallybeer”]I need to send you some of my beers. The Wooky Jack clone is spot on and even better. FWIW.
Along with a simple ESB that’s better than aged Fullers. Yes we can at least make a beer that’s just as good or even better. Freshness helps a lot, among other things. Cheers to all.[/quote]
I’d love to try your beers. But I have a couple comments that I hope you won’t take the wrong way. If the clone is “spot on”, how can it be better? And should an ESB be aged?
Taste certainly is subjective. I think it’s definitely possible to brew beer better than what’s in the stores. Why not? Obviously there are exceptions. There’s a lot of bad beer out there and there’s a lot of great beer out there. Saying you definitely cannot brew beer better than what’s commercially available is setting yourself up for failure. Besides, what can be better than brewing to your own tastes? The beer isn’t necessarily “better”, it’s just different, and it’s YOURS. Maybe that’s how his Rochefort clone is “better”.
And I don’t think it’s possible to exactly clone a beer from a commercial brewery. There are so many different factors that contribute to the final outcome.
My single largest cost is typically my water. I use bottled water, because my home water is as hard as a rock and my softened water (water softener and potassium permanganate iron filtered) is too salty, even if diluted.
As to commercial brews - there are some unreachables, but as more come out, there are more and more inferior ones.
This hobby can quickly become obsessive and obsessing over making better beer is a wonderful thing. For what it is worth Denny and others have suggested making the same beer over and over to dial in your process and equipment - that is the best advice and I have followed it. Even so, because every one of my brews is likely to differ in some way (even if only by yeast generation), I never call them the same thing. It leaves me something to think about as my mash is doing its thing - my last beer? A “Helles Choir Boy” - Helles with a little Vienna to it.
Great thoughts from all of you - thanks for the continuing insights!
[quote=“Denny”][quote=“wallybeer”]I need to send you some of my beers. The Wooky Jack clone is spot on and even better. FWIW.
Along with a simple ESB that’s better than aged Fullers. Yes we can at least make a beer that’s just as good or even better. Freshness helps a lot, among other things. Cheers to all.[/quote]
I’d love to try your beers. But I have a couple comments that I hope you won’t take the wrong way. If the clone is “spot on”, how can it be better? And should an ESB be aged?[/quote]
Just to clarify. The clone beer seemed to have just a tad bit more hop aroma, which was pleasing. The rest of the profile was so close to the original that I think it was spot on, at least for my palate and also for 2 of my homebrewing friends.
About the ESB, I meant aged Fullers, like sitting on the shelf for a while. who knows how long.
The fresh ESB was very tasty and much better than what I can get at my beer store.
I think point 1 is usually overstated. If you start with clean, functional equipment (I’m talking fermenter), you’re mostly there. You don’t need to worry about anything pre-boil and once fermentation is fully under way you’re pretty much in the clear. The time between flame out and active fermentation being the critical time.
I mix about a gallon of one step solution in a clean, scratch-free primary vessel before I start the brew then give the container a good wipe with the solution before moving the cooled wort from the kettle (of course I pour out the sanitizing solution before I transfer the wort). That’s it. Sanitation is just not one of those things you need to obsess about.
[quote=“wallybeer”]Just to clarify. The clone beer seemed to have just a tad bit more hop aroma, which was pleasing. The rest of the profile was so close to the original that I think it was spot on, at least for my palate and also for 2 of my homebrewing friends.
About the ESB, I meant aged Fullers, like sitting on the shelf for a while. who knows how long.
The fresh ESB was very tasty and much better than what I can get at my beer store.
