Sampled my latest beer this weekend. It's the beer I'm doing the crown beer experiment on. And it tastes great, just not what I expected.
The recipe is as follows and apologies if the format is incorrect.
3.6kg Marris otter
1.15kg Munich
0.7kg Dark Crystal
1tsp salt
37 litres strike water
mashed at 64°c 90 minutes
mashout at 77°c 20 minutes - Dark Crystal added at this step.
Boil 90 minutes
Northern brewer 52g 60 minutes
East Kent Goldings 27g 15 minutes
East Kent Goldings 10g 5 minutes
US-05 Ale yeast fermented 14 days at 16°c
I don't have the a/a% at hand for the hops but can update if anyone is interested.
The beer turned out to be a cracker, nice colour, lovely creamy head with the flavour tending toward malt. But and a very big but, it has all the flavour and characteristics of a belgium beer, even down to the banana esters it's both the best and the weirdest beers I've made to date.
I'd like if some one or others could brew this recipe and tell me their results. I'd be fascinated to know if I have stumbled onto a Belgium style without a Belgium yeast.
Post #2 made 10 years ago
Nice to see you using a decent yeast for a change hashie 
.
Sounds to me though like you may have scored a good wild yeast in the process as well as there's no way you'll get the banana out of US-05, een at high temps from memory. Do you reckon a wild yeast might be a possibility?
Did it turn out really dark as well with the crystal?
Cheers mate
PP
P.S. I have no comment on the format you have published your recipe in. Bob will like it though .
.Sounds to me though like you may have scored a good wild yeast in the process as well as there's no way you'll get the banana out of US-05, een at high temps from memory. Do you reckon a wild yeast might be a possibility?
Did it turn out really dark as well with the crystal?
Cheers mate
PP
P.S. I have no comment on the format you have published your recipe in. Bob will like it though
.If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia
-
Post #3 made 10 years ago
Its a one in a million luck of the draw kind of thing but my guess would be that maybe he has been lucky and somehow ended up with his wort being innoculated with some remenant witbier yeast cells floating around in the brewing area that overpowered his pitched yeast rather than a wild yeast to produce those flavour compounds. Sounds real interesting hashie.
Post #5 made 10 years ago
I doubt it is the recipe, Hashie. Common causes are under pitching or fermenting at too high a temp.. But if you were successful in keeping it at 16*C.. that could be eliminated.
Bill
Hop Song Brewing-Santa Rosa, California
Hop Song Brewing-Santa Rosa, California
Post #6 made 10 years ago
PP, as you know I've had a bit of a hiatus from brewing. When I brewed the previous beer US-05 was the only yeast I had to hand. It was probably 5 years old but still viable. The yeast for this brew was the same, but I used it from a bottle ie. I drank the previous beer and then swished the bottle out with fresh wort to get it going again. The beer was quite dark, given the amount of dark crystal. More a dark red than anything else.
Pist, I brew in a cellar type arrangement to maintain temps. It is quite feasible that I have had some wild yeast get in, just not sure?
Dave I have several bottles with yeast samples in the bottom, so yes I have it for future use. I guess the best thing to do is make a different style using the same yeast and see how it turns out?
Under pitching may have been the cause HbgBill, as I've stated above, I used recycled yeast. Fermentation was away within 3 days of pitching and the temperature was stable for the 2 week ferment.
Pist, I brew in a cellar type arrangement to maintain temps. It is quite feasible that I have had some wild yeast get in, just not sure?
Dave I have several bottles with yeast samples in the bottom, so yes I have it for future use. I guess the best thing to do is make a different style using the same yeast and see how it turns out?
Under pitching may have been the cause HbgBill, as I've stated above, I used recycled yeast. Fermentation was away within 3 days of pitching and the temperature was stable for the 2 week ferment.
"It's beer Jim, but not as we know it."
Post #7 made 10 years ago
I'll pony up another 2 cents 
I had a little down time yesterday during the primary elections and started re-reading Brewing Classic Styles. To paraphrase/quote some of this that seems appropriate.. and you probably know this as an old timer.
Under pitching causes some interesting problems. They said, in part: Low pitching rates mean more total cell growth, (seems good, right?), more amino acid synthesis, and therefore more by-products. Diacetyl and acetaldehyde are removed by the yeast during conditioning phase of fermentation, but esters and fusel alcohols are not.
You said it's the best and weirdest you've made. Congrats! That sounds interesting to me Re-used yeast from a previous batch, especially old yeast, certainly could be the culprit.. i.e., not producing what you had expected. I'd just enjoy. Oh, another question out of curiosity. Was the prior beer you got the yeast from light or dark? and was it a similar style beer? I ask because yeast become selective to the wort they are in and the alcohol percent produced.. producing a mutation specific to that beer. I'm just playing with washing and have found (for myself) that the washings produce a different beer than the first generation.
Sounds like fun.. but, I'd bet the secret is not in the recipe, as it's pretty straight forward.. rather the yeast. Send me a bottle.. I'd be quite happy to give you a personal evaluation.
Wow, the stars came together John Palmer was being interviewed today on Beersmith.. This plays to an extent on what I mentioned.. plus a ton more info.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d35Gfn6pXBw
I had a little down time yesterday during the primary elections and started re-reading Brewing Classic Styles. To paraphrase/quote some of this that seems appropriate.. and you probably know this as an old timer.Under pitching causes some interesting problems. They said, in part: Low pitching rates mean more total cell growth, (seems good, right?), more amino acid synthesis, and therefore more by-products. Diacetyl and acetaldehyde are removed by the yeast during conditioning phase of fermentation, but esters and fusel alcohols are not.
You said it's the best and weirdest you've made. Congrats! That sounds interesting to me
Re-used yeast from a previous batch, especially old yeast, certainly could be the culprit.. i.e., not producing what you had expected. I'd just enjoy. Oh, another question out of curiosity. Was the prior beer you got the yeast from light or dark? and was it a similar style beer? I ask because yeast become selective to the wort they are in and the alcohol percent produced.. producing a mutation specific to that beer. I'm just playing with washing and have found (for myself) that the washings produce a different beer than the first generation.Sounds like fun.. but, I'd bet the secret is not in the recipe, as it's pretty straight forward.. rather the yeast. Send me a bottle.. I'd be quite happy to give you a personal evaluation.
Wow, the stars came together
John Palmer was being interviewed today on Beersmith.. This plays to an extent on what I mentioned.. plus a ton more info.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d35Gfn6pXBw
Bill
Hop Song Brewing-Santa Rosa, California
Hop Song Brewing-Santa Rosa, California
Post #8 made 10 years ago
Ah, I think I can see what has happened, thanks.
"It's beer Jim, but not as we know it."
Post #10 made 10 years ago
I think it's the yeast.
At first I thought it must have been an infection, albeit a good one. However I believe my sanitation process to be robust enough to counter this thought. I brew in a 30 litre stainless conical fermenter with 2 x stainless ball valves. The valves are stripped and sanitised between each brew and the fermenter is sanitised before each use with "Starsan". I think there are a number of factors such as;
under pitching, double pitching and perhaps a triple ferment.
I first pitched yeast from a previous batch, it fired but stalled. I then pitched a packet of dry yeast (3rd day), which took off. I believe the dry yeast acted as a nutrient to the wet yeast that stalled and then restarted it's ferment. My guess is that the initial stall was a result of under pitching, which gave the banana esters. This yeast then multiplied when the conditions were right (after pitching the dry yeast) and created the condition for a tertiary ferment. It also explains why the 'Belgian' yeast is the predominant yeast as it would have been the last to be active.
The thing to do now is to brew the same beer with the same yeast and taste the result.
At first I thought it must have been an infection, albeit a good one. However I believe my sanitation process to be robust enough to counter this thought. I brew in a 30 litre stainless conical fermenter with 2 x stainless ball valves. The valves are stripped and sanitised between each brew and the fermenter is sanitised before each use with "Starsan". I think there are a number of factors such as;
under pitching, double pitching and perhaps a triple ferment.
I first pitched yeast from a previous batch, it fired but stalled. I then pitched a packet of dry yeast (3rd day), which took off. I believe the dry yeast acted as a nutrient to the wet yeast that stalled and then restarted it's ferment. My guess is that the initial stall was a result of under pitching, which gave the banana esters. This yeast then multiplied when the conditions were right (after pitching the dry yeast) and created the condition for a tertiary ferment. It also explains why the 'Belgian' yeast is the predominant yeast as it would have been the last to be active.
The thing to do now is to brew the same beer with the same yeast and taste the result.
"It's beer Jim, but not as we know it."
