Did not hit target OG, why?

Post #1 made 11 years ago
I attempted to make a clone of Double Crooked Tree IPA - Dark Horse Brewing Company.
My target OG was 1.130. I only made it to 1.110 OG. I did a 90 minute mash and a 90 min boil. If I would have boiled it any longer I would have passed my target VIF.
Can someone look at my recipe and tell me what I could have done different.
I try to stir the mash about every 15 - 20 min and add heat as needed.


Thanks for any thought and/or advice!!
Brandon
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Post #2 made 11 years ago
blacasterb, I just took a quick look at your file and what stood out for me was your efficiency adjustment. For a brew of this gravity you should probably only expect around 65%. At least that is what I found in my high gravity BIAB days.
AWOL

Post #3 made 11 years ago
You are referring to section x right? This was the first time I ever put anything in that field for efficiency. I had read another post that mentioned it and said to put the efficiency of the original recipe in that field.... Granted it was not a biab recipe.
So next time I brew this I need to lower that % which will increase my grain, thus raising my OG?
I'm still trying to figure out this spreadsheet and what everything means/does.
Last edited by blancasterb on 17 Mar 2014, 05:22, edited 1 time in total.

Post #4 made 11 years ago
Keep at it. From what I saw, you already have a real good handle on the BIABacus. On your next go maybe post it for the BIABacus gods to go over for you and you will be amazed at how close your numbers will be. Well done.
AWOL

Post #5 made 11 years ago
Hi there blancasterb,

As Lylo noticed, you have done a great job on the sheet. There's a few problems though...

Do not over-ride BIABacus auto-efficiency.

1. As Lylo mentioned, putting the opriginal recipes "efficiecny" into Section X is a mistake and you probably just read a post and misinterpereted that bit. Occasionally we will use the original recipe's "efficiecny" as a means of detecting what the original author meant in a poorly written/worded recipe.

The long and short of it is that someone else's "Efficiecny"whetehr it be a kettle or fermentor efficiency will not be the same as yours unless you have exactly the same equipment and brew the same way.

The BIABacus actually negates the need for you to actually know anything about efficiency because it works it out for you.

Let's delete the 75% in Section X. You'll see that the estimated kettle efficiencies have dropped from 75% to 59% and the required grain bill has jumped from 13524 grams to 17180 grams.

You'll also see a red warning pop up in Section A and V saying Recipe won't work! You are out of bounds!

Why is this happening and how do we fix it?

Handling high gravity brews.

The BIAbacus is throwing a warning above because basically your mash is far too thick. Obviously if you put a drop of water onto a cup of oats, you won't be eating porridge. While that is an exaggeration, we do need a reasonable liquor to grain ratio to make a mash worthwhile.

There are two ways around the above.

The first is to use a 90 minute boil and just supplement the brew with extract/sugar however if you want a pure all-grain high gravity brew, the only way to increase the amount of water contacting the grist is to extend the boil time and that is what the craft breweries do.

Lets increase your boil time to 180 minutes. Here's what happens...

1. We lose the warning.
2. The kettle efficiencies in Section P rise from 59% to 67.3%.
3. The TWN in Section K rises.
4. The grain bill required drops from 17180 grams to 15078 grams.

Some further notes.

I've actually written a lot on high gravity brews this year so I would take some time to do abit of study as this is really a very extreme brew. Do an Advanced Search of posts done by me with the phrase "high gravity".

For example...

I'm worried that the auto-efficiency on such a high gravity brew is still too high. You may have to over-ride the percentage a bit. Read this post.

This thread is a study of someone else's high gravity brew but that was only a tiny 1.080 :). In that thread though you will learn a tiny bit about "gravity points". ANother advanced search of my posts should come up with a fuller explanation. You want to be knowledgeable about these before your brew day so as you can play around with your boil time to get the right OG. (You may or may not get the volume you are after. That will depend on how good the auto-estimates is).

Evaporation rate varies from brew day to brew day. With a 180 minute boil, you will have time to take a few volume readings and estimate the evap rate on that day. YOu will be able to manipulate the boil time to ensure you end up with the right OG. Treat gravity as your primary concern, not volume. You will get what you get on the volume - more if you are lucky, less more likely.

We really need numbers on massive brews like this so do your best to record some volume and gravity sets for us.

:peace:
PP
Last edited by PistolPatch on 17 Mar 2014, 15:17, edited 1 time in total.
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 #6 made 11 years ago
Looks like you are taken care of with the technical stuff. I don't think this recipe has any chance of being close to a clone.

I've had this beer, it is awesome no doubt .. blew me away every time I was lucky enough to get it.

My issue here is that you have a serious imbalance of BU:GU (bitterness to gravity ratio). This will likely be a cloyingly sweet beer with nowhere near the bitterness or hoppy flavors you are expecting. .325 BU:GU is well under style guidelines, and knowing the beer it's at least triple that.

6.66oz of hops for such a huge DIPA is way way way way under. A beer like this should be hovering around a 1 lb total (including dry hops).

Here are some clues from Dark Horse website.
The Crooked Tree is heavily dry hopped to give it a big aroma of pine and citrus.
^ That is for their regular Crooked Tree. You have 2oz of dry hops, which no reasonable person could ever consider that "heavily" dry hopped. Especially considering the following for the Double ..
Have you read the description for the regular Crooked Tree yet? Well this beer is almost the same just double the flavor and alcohol. We actually took the Crooked Tree recipe and doubled all of the ingredients except the water, just the way a DOUBLE should be made.

Just to give an idea. Avery Maharaja is right in the ballpark of hoppiness/gravity as Double Crooked Tree, IMO. According to their website, they dry hop with nearly 9oz of hops, plus another 6oz or so in the kettle for the same size batch.

For reference, I use about 7oz of total hops for 5G(VIP) of my 1.052 OG house pale ale.
Last edited by Rick on 17 Mar 2014, 23:13, edited 1 time in total.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #7 made 11 years ago
Oh wow! Thanks PP! What a wealth of information! I am going to have to try this one again, this time doing it correctly!!
It never occurred to me to do a longer boil like that!
So I should keep my mash at 90 minutes, and increase boil to 180 correct?

Rick thank you for the schooling on the hops! Is that BU:GU info in the spreadsheet? Im looking and just now seeing it :nup:
If its not in there how can I calculate this myself and know that I getting the right ratio?

Im still pretty new to brewing, will be one year in April lol. I did a few kits, and was like eh... Took a homebrew class that my local club offered at the local college and learned about BIAB and been hooked ever since!!
I have made some damn good beers if I must say so myself!!

I really do appreciate everyones help in the forums!

I have two more questions.... first Section H - Assuming attenuation of.... where do I get that #?
I see that if I put something in there it changes final numbers in section R.

Next question. I found the latest beta PR1.3K by accident. Where is the best place to find the newest builds on this board?
They seem to jump up in random posts...
Thanks
Brandon

Post #8 made 11 years ago
Heh, you have been brewing longer than I have. Take that FWIW, I started in May of last year.

BU:GU/bitterness to gravity .. is calculated in BIABacus section A on the left side.

Here is a decent chart for reference, it has Imperial IPA at 1.13 ... which is about right.
Last edited by Rick on 18 Mar 2014, 08:42, edited 1 time in total.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #9 made 11 years ago
I have two more questions.... first Section H - Assuming attenuation of.... where do I get that #?
I see that if I put something in there it changes final numbers in section R.
This depends on the yeast used, and also mash temperature plays a factor in how fermentable the beer will be. Mash pH can also play a role in fermentability, but I don't really know how much. This knowledge comes with experience, so I wouldn't worry about it right yet. Some of the folks here might be able to give you an idea, but I'm unfamiliar with nottingham myself.

A quick search tells me that 85% is possible with a 152 mash and notty. BIABacus default setting is 75%, so you can override to see what 85% will get you. But, no promises there as there are many variables at play .. it's nearly impossible to predict this with any accuracy.

Next question. I found the latest beta PR1.3K by accident. Where is the best place to find the newest builds on this board?
They seem to jump up in random posts...
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1869#p25993

Scroll down to the red text, and 1.3k is listed there. The site is being restructured and this will be easier to find soon enough ... hopefully. :D
Last edited by Rick on 18 Mar 2014, 08:57, edited 1 time in total.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #11 made 11 years ago
Thanks, but I have you fooled!! :D

My focus has been solely on hoppy ales(APA, IPA, DIPA) right from the start, and if you take notice I do not comment on much else outside of that. Well, as far as brewing is concerned.

I was pretty much born and raised in the hobby right here on this site, was lucky enough to find it early before my brain was poisoned by all the misinformation out there.

I'll give myself points for dedication to the craft, but this place is like 93% responsible for all I know.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #12 made 11 years ago
Wow! Great posts Rick! Nice :thumbs:.

blancasterb, yep, just mash for 90 minute. DO a mash-out if you can as that does increase your efficiency into the boil. (This might be solely due to the increased mash time it results in. We don't know yet.) And yes boil for 180 minutes or more or less. The reason for the extra boil time is to allow you to wash the grain in more liquor. Once you have done that, the aim is to get rid of that extra liquor (water) used through evaporation.

So set your BIABacus for 180 minutes but also see if, on brew day, you can find a way of speeding up that evaporation. It might be something as simple as aiming a very small fan into the wort. Do some experimenting and research how "gravity points" work.

Apologies for how hard the latest version of the BIABacus has been to find. That is my job and I never put the latest version where it was easy to find as I always thought I was going to get a chance to post a new official version "next week". But, three times now, I have had unexpected stuff come up which has delayed things.

People like Rick have been giving excellent answers here lately and I have been working on the BIABacus for the first time in ages thanks to those answers. Have done all the hard stuff except for one thing so I think we can whack out a final pre-release (without help links) within the next few weeks. (I had a few days written in that last sentence but changed it to a few weeks because the next pre-release will require a lot of threads get retired and a new basic help thread written or a video recorded.)

:peace:
PP
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 #13 made 11 years ago
I took the 75% out of Section X
I increased my boil time to 180, which increased my TWN to 12.54 Gallons
I now have a red flag WARNING: Mash volume exceeds kettle size.

I have a 15.5 gallon half barrel converted to a kettle.

How do I handle this?
I was looking at Section W but then was thinking if I use less water in the mash then im defeating the purpose right?
The only thing I can think of is to reduce batch size?
Any other suggestions?

Post #14 made 11 years ago
Personally, I'd bring OG down to 1.110 and do the 90 minute boil. 85% attenuation brings it to 12%ABV that Dark Horse website lists the beer as.

You could replace some of the base malt with dextrose, method used in Pliny the Younger to boost a bit while reducing mash displacement. I don't think it's needed, but it's an option.

It's not like this recipe has integrity anyway, so why are we so set on 1.130 to achieve 12%ABV?
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #15 made 11 years ago
I had my way with your file. :smoke:

I'm ignoring the BU:GU we talked about earlier, but this seems to satisfy the common recipe that is bandied around.

The batch size/VAW terminology does not always mean the same thing outside of this forum, so I upped that in Sec. D to 23L.

Grain totals are the proper amounts now @ 1.105 OG. 90 minute boil, 11.5% alcohol with potential for more, plenty of room in the kettle for full volume BIAB. How does that work for you, good, no?

Also, why are you adding CaCl to the boil? This is often used to lower mash pH and/or to satisfy a water profile, and generally added before the mash. If you do not have brewing water worked out, this may be a redundant step.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #16 made 11 years ago
Rick wrote:Personally, I'd bring OG down to 1.110 and do the 90 minute boil. 85% attenuation brings it to 12%ABV that Dark Horse website lists the beer as.
Ok explain this (I don't mean to be dumb about this, I just want to fully understand)
How does this work - again the attenuation question... how do you determine that? and how do I know if im going to get 85%
If I lower OG down, I can play with the number in attenuation to get whatever gravity I want, but I cant grasp how the attenuation thing works, or how you would know to choose 85 or 75 or whatever, and how to achieve that.
I guess Im not understanding how you can take a recipe that has an OG of 1.130 and change it to 1.110 and get nearly the same ABV.
Rick wrote:It's not like this recipe has integrity anyway, so why are we so set on 1.130 to achieve 12%ABV?
I kinda get the integrity thing as far as the definition on here.. when not enough info is provided in the original recipe to copy it, but why do you say this recipe has no integrity?

Here is recipe source (yeah I know.. brewtoad... home of the mostly crap recipes.... lol)
http://www.brewtoad.com/recipes/double-" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... tree-clone
Last edited by blancasterb on 19 Mar 2014, 10:13, edited 1 time in total.

Post #17 made 11 years ago
Rick wrote:I had my way with your file. :smoke:

I'm ignoring the BU:GU we talked about earlier, but this seems to satisfy the common recipe that is bandied around.

The batch size/VAW terminology does not always mean the same thing outside of this forum, so I upped that in Sec. D to 23L.

Grain totals are the proper amounts now @ 1.105 OG. 90 minute boil, 11.5% alcohol with potential for more, plenty of room in the kettle for full volume BIAB. How does that work for you, good, no?

Also, why are you adding CaCl to the boil? This is often used to lower mash pH and/or to satisfy a water profile, and generally added before the mash. If you do not have brewing water worked out, this may be a redundant step.

You probably hate me by now lol!! :shoot:
Ok so you changed Section D to 23L - This affects hop bill only right?
How does this work? I see changing the L of the "original" recipe to a larger size decreases the amount of hops in the bill?

Also you say grain totals are the proper amounts? How do you determine this? You lowered OG to get those amounts? Why are they the correct amounts now vs before?

As far as CaCL I was told by other brewers in the club im in to add 4g to most beers, but brews with more hops I should only add 2g. This is due to the water in my area. I thought for sure they said add to the boil.... should I be adding that to the mash instead? Or should I omit it completely?

The last test posted only our clubs message board for my town was from Dec 2012

Calcium, Ca 81
Magnesium, Mg 21
Bicarbonate, HCO3 209
Sodium, Na 26
Sulfate, SO4-S 39
Chloride, Cl 33

Total Hardness, CaCO3 290
Total Alkalinity, CaCO3 171

This was water straight out of the tap.

When I brew, I purchase 5 gallon of RO water from the grocery store (they have a machine you put you 5 gal jug in and fill up for like 1.80
The remaining water I run through a carbon filter from my tap

This is just how I was told how to do it...
Last edited by blancasterb on 19 Mar 2014, 10:26, edited 1 time in total.

Post #18 made 11 years ago
Hate you? Nahh, I live for this stuff. I'll address the water in this post, and the rest in another. I think we may have uncovered your low kettle efficiency issue, or at least a contributing factor.

I plugged your information into Brun'water (file will be attached, and double check me for errors please .. as I flew through it pretty quickly). I used your original BIABacus file in the first post, since that is brewed already (not the one I changed).

Adding CaCl is good advice, but it has to be in the mash water to do any good for pH. Otherwise, you are predicted to be above a 5.8pH. This could be a contributing factor to your low kettle efficiency. Adding 2g doesn't change anything, but 4g will drop it to 5.7 (which is okay but still dancing with the devil, IMO). John Palmer recommends shooting for 5.1-5.5 mash pH, fyi.

I selected pale ale profile from the drop down, you'll notice the sulfates are higher for this style. This is to enhance bitterness, which is good for the style. Gypsum/CaSO4 is added to achieve this, which also helps bring mash pH down(also adds calcium) ... so your homebrew friends suggestions could have been due to one using gypsum, and the other not. Just a guess.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Rick on 19 Mar 2014, 21:16, edited 1 time in total.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #19 made 11 years ago
blancasterb wrote:

You probably hate me by now lol!! :shoot:
Ok so you changed Section D to 23L - This affects hop bill only right?
How does this work? I see changing the L of the "original" recipe to a larger size decreases the amount of hops in the bill?
Yes. Batch size can mean anything out there. It typically means what we now call VAW, but outside of here it can mean VIF, or even VIP I've seen a few times. Actually, I saw it associated with VIP first .. and it took a while for the guys here to correct me about it. That confused me for quite a while.

Anyway, yes ... it matches the hop bill totals to the common recipe that I am finding. This gives me evidence and the ability to make an educated guess about what this brewer means by "Batch Size". I think he means VIF, which puts VAW closer to 6G.

My guess is this brewtoad brewer used the common Crooked Tree recipe as a starting point as well, and simply messed around until everything looked "double".

Also you say grain totals are the proper amounts? How do you determine this? You lowered OG to get those amounts? Why are they the correct amounts now vs before?
Because I trust the BIABacus over what looks to be a bunch of hack brewers trying to clone a beer with no actual information. I never would have attempted to clone this recipe due to lack of information, plus I think "cloning" is a waste of time anyway. But, that's just one man's opinion. The important thing is that you want this to work, and it's just as good a starting point as anyone will find really.
Last edited by Rick on 19 Mar 2014, 20:39, edited 1 time in total.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #20 made 11 years ago
blancasterb wrote:I took the 75% out of Section X
I increased my boil time to 180, which increased my TWN to 12.54 Gallons
I now have a red flag WARNING: Mash volume exceeds kettle size.

I have a 15.5 gallon half barrel converted to a kettle.

How do I handle this?
I was looking at Section W but then was thinking if I use less water in the mash then im defeating the purpose right?
The only thing I can think of is to reduce batch size?
Any other suggestions?
Bugger! Bugger! Bugger!

My apologies Blanc, I didn't notice the mash volume warning and the reason I said Bugger above is that I had a mental note mad ages ago to make sure tht the BIAbacus threw a "Recipe Out of Bounds" warning when mash volume or kettle volume were exceeded. It sounds easy to do (and sometimes it is) but first I have to check through many other layers.

Anyway, your thinking is right, you are defeating the purpose. Your thinking to reduce the 'batch' size is correct.

....

I've been working for way too many hours today now but on the integrity thing, what Rick is saying is that in the original recipe, it says, "Efficiency: 75.0%." Apart from it not saying whether the 75.0% is a kettle efficiency or a fermentor efficiency, it would be impossible to achieve 1.130 on a 60 minute boil time let alone a 180 minute one.

The recipe, like nearly all of them on the internet has been published by someone who has never brewed the recipe before.

DON'T TRUST RECIPES FROM OTHER SITES UNLESS YOU GET THEM CHECKED HERE FIRST!!!!

:peace:
PP

P.S. Rick you posted before me but can you answer blanc's attenuation question in #16 if you get time?

Blanc, some of your questions are slipping past. Just take your time and repost them if they still don't get answered.
Last edited by PistolPatch on 19 Mar 2014, 20:39, edited 1 time in total.
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 #21 made 11 years ago
blancasterb wrote: Ok explain this (I don't mean to be dumb about this, I just want to fully understand)
How does this work - again the attenuation question... how do you determine that? and how do I know if im going to get 85%
If I lower OG down, I can play with the number in attenuation to get whatever gravity I want, but I cant grasp how the attenuation thing works, or how you would know to choose 85 or 75 or whatever, and how to achieve that.
I guess Im not understanding how you can take a recipe that has an OG of 1.130 and change it to 1.110 and get nearly the same ABV.
Perhaps reading/re-reading the yeast section of How to Brew - John Palmer would be wise? I couldn't put the technical jargon any better than that, so it might be worth a look.

You can look up the attenuation range of any yeast either on the product itself, or on the manufacturers website. WPL001 I have experience with, so I know how it works on my setup. This is the yeast you would have used if you followed the brewtoad recipe, but you changed it. Perhaps the 1.130 OG was chosed due to the original brewers knowledge of his setup with WPL001 yeast. You used nottingham, which is known to attenuate relatively higher ... 1.130 may not be needed to achieve the same abv%. Once your brew ferments, we will have a data point. Of course we cannot put much respect to one measurement, but it will be something.

You will get to the point of knowing yeast behavior eventually, it simply takes experience. Yeast attenuation is an organic process with many variables affecting it. We have uncovered some issues with your process which may work against you (or for you) in that regard. Also, who is to say your thermometers are correct? If they read 152, and you actually were mashing at 147 ... the yeast would attenuate higher as a result. This is where experience and repeated brews within your equipment (read: experiments) will help. Nobody can predict what your yeast will do, as there are far too many variables involved.

Your thermometers have read 152, and we'll see what attenuation you get with nottingham. It's that simple. Either this will repeat, or changing some things in your process will affect that. More data points are needed, it's that simple.
I kinda get the integrity thing as far as the definition on here.. when not enough info is provided in the original recipe to copy it, but why do you say this recipe has no integrity?
Minus the errors/issues already mentioned in previous posts ...

I recall looking into Dark Horse brewing before, and maybe you came across the same bit of information I did. But, nottingham was said to be the house strain for Crooked Tree. IIRC, it was a former employee that disclosed this information? Can we trust it? No. But, it might be .. trying it out is not unreasonable. If this is true, why did brewtoad list WPL001?

Everything about this recipe is simply trash, sorry. Heh, but hey .. it's never a bad thing to try it out. There isn't much else to go on. Plus, you will learn a few things and be better prepared for the next time.

Once you taste the beer you have in process, you may not want anything to do with the recipe. I'd wait on that before you pour any more time into it. I don't mind doing this, because this is a perfect learning opportunity, and yet another confirmation on how terrible the recipes are on brewtoad.
Last edited by Rick on 19 Mar 2014, 20:58, edited 1 time in total.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #22 made 11 years ago
PistolPatch wrote:
P.S. Rick you posted before me but can you answer blanc's attenuation question in #16 if you get time?

Blanc, some of your questions are slipping past. Just take your time and repost them if they still don't get answered.

I got your back. :salute:
Last edited by Rick on 19 Mar 2014, 21:08, edited 1 time in total.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #23 made 11 years ago
You will get to the point of knowing yeast behavior eventually, it simply takes experience. Yeast attenuation is an organic process with many variables affecting it. We have uncovered some issues with your process which may work against you (or for you) in that regard.

I'll elaborate on this. Once you correct your water situation, the kettle efficiency and general fermentability of the beer is going to change. (see attached photo).

Also:

Note that *too high* a mash pH produces poorer extraction/kettle efficiency. Higher pH also causes the yeast to attenuate lower due to the wort not being as fermentable as it could be. These are some of the variables I have mentioned in previous posts. Also, too high a pH is known to extract tannins from the grain husks, leading to astringent flavors. This is more of a synergistic effect of grain temperature and pH, not simply pH alone. I'm not sure if a mashout could have done harm. Anyone have input on this?

Source

The pH of the raw water used in brewing has only modest impact on the brewing process. The primary interest to brewing is the pH of the wort during mashing. Factors such as water alkalinity and mash grist composition have greater effect on mashing pH than the starting pH of the raw water.

The pH of the mash influences a number of factors in brewing including; fermentability, color, clarity, and taste of the wort and beer. A slightly acidic mash pH of between 5.2 and 5.8 (measured at room-temperature) improves the enzymatic processes during mashing. The lower end of that range produces more fermentable wort and thinner body. The lower end of that range also produces better extraction efficiency, lighter color, better hot break formation, and the beer is less prone to form haze. Allowing the mash pH to fall below this lower boundary increases the potential to solubilize excess protein into the wort (De Clerck, 1957). The upper end of that range produces less fermentable wort and more body (Briggs et. al., 1981). Tailoring the mash pH helps a brewer create the wort character desired for the finished beer. In most cases, narrowing the target mash pH range to between 5.3 and 5.5 is recommended.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Rick on 19 Mar 2014, 21:24, edited 1 time in total.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America

Post #24 made 11 years ago
Thanks to you both for the valuable information. Even though this recipe is crap, you took the time to help :thumbs:
I am going to read and re-read this stuff over and over till I think I understand it, and I may have some more questions.
The knowledge gained with this crap recipe can only help me with other brews.

I have an Irish Red that I want you guys to look at, I will post it in a day or so over in the integrity post.
I have brewed it before and everyone says it is wonderful.
Our brew club has a yearly event called Big Turkey. A style is chosen by the club and everyone can submit entries. They have judges come in and score our brews. The winner among other things gets to personally brew their recipe on a commercial system (courtesy Carsons Brewery http://carsonsbrewery.com/ ) We have a tapping party and then the beer is kegged and distributed to local bars and restaurants for everyone to enjoy. Pretty dang cool if you ask me.
Well this year the style is Scottish/Irish Ale. I want to win this thing!! lol!!
So between now and then I have to perfect everything that Im learning in this thread plus more!
BTW my brew club is www.OVHA.net
Also one of the guys in our club has a great site, I have seen it posted on a few threads around here, www.brew365.com Check it out.

Post #25 made 11 years ago
No worries blanc ;),

We'll look forward to seeing your next recipe in the integrity thread. If it comes from your mate's site* then there are four major errors in the recipe description I can see on a quick glance. If he is an open-minded brewer willing to learn etc, then get him to join here, contact me or at least read here as this site is a lot more than just BIAB. Because BIAB has fewer numbers to deal with we have been ground-breaking in that area.

;)
PP

* I didn't copy your mate's site above as I didn't want Google to associate it with error but, if I didn't see a change in his terminology etc within six months, then I probably would name the site and the errors. Maybe your mate's site can be the first one after BIABrewer.info to incorporate unambiguous terminolgy? I'll certainly help him if he is interested.
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 Reply

Return to “Intermediate Brewing”

Brewers Online

Brewers browsing this forum: No members and 21 guests