So, I've been having a look at the BIABacus. I think I've got the idea now but I have a quick question or two regarding hopping. Specifically I've been looking at this one which is nice and simple, a good starting point for my plan:
BIABacus PR 1.0 - American Pale Ale - NRB%27s All Amarillo APA.xls
I'm planing as SMaSH brew as a simple introduction using Maris Otter malt. So deleting the two superfluous malts I can see that the grain bill for the remaining malt is increased to make up for the consequent reduction in sugar. That being the case there must be a default setting for any fermentables that I enter and I can see that that is indeed the case (section x I think). Therein is an option to adjust for potential sugar. Looking at another chart I found on this forum, I can see that MO has a potential of 82% rather than the 80% default and I guess I could change that but doubt it will make much difference so I guess I'll leave that be.
The query I have really is regarding any changes that may be needed since I've removed the darker malts from the original recipe. Is this change going to affect overall bitterness? I can see that the colour is going to change but will the "hopping" still stand? I'm only planning a 2 gallon batch on the stove (kettle restrictions mainly, but it makes sense to me to mitigate potential wastage in the first instance anyway), and I intend to split the two batches to hop each batch separately and (hopefully) educate my palate a little in the process. I can certainly stick with the original hopping for 1 gallon adjusted for quantity (unless I need to make additional changes wrt malt changes), but if I were to say use Fuggles for the remaining gallon do the original measurements still stand or does BIABacus adjust for this too?
I think that's about it for now. I'm not in a great rush by any means, I just want to get it right.
Post #2 made 10 years ago
Your observations are correct about extraction potential, it'll be a trivial difference at the homebrew level.
American Pale Ale in general is pretty safe in the 30-45 IBU range as far as BJCP expectation is concerned. Regardless of malts or hops used (within style), it's going to be balanced. If anything the amber malt in the original recipe would cut into that BJCP expectation, and warrant an even higher level of IBU for hop heads like myself. So looking back, you are kinda restoring that expectation considering the IBU's are on the low side for the recipe. On that BJCP page there is also an American Amber below it(one could argue NRB fits there as well), which calls for fewer IBU's, my guess is to accentuate the malt characteristics. Brewing is an art, and that is my logic at work ... so take it FWIW.
I'm all for breaking the BJCP stylistic "rules" at this point, but I also feel it's important to learn within their ranges in the beginning of one's brewship.
American Pale Ale in general is pretty safe in the 30-45 IBU range as far as BJCP expectation is concerned. Regardless of malts or hops used (within style), it's going to be balanced. If anything the amber malt in the original recipe would cut into that BJCP expectation, and warrant an even higher level of IBU for hop heads like myself. So looking back, you are kinda restoring that expectation considering the IBU's are on the low side for the recipe. On that BJCP page there is also an American Amber below it(one could argue NRB fits there as well), which calls for fewer IBU's, my guess is to accentuate the malt characteristics. Brewing is an art, and that is my logic at work ... so take it FWIW.
I'm all for breaking the BJCP stylistic "rules" at this point, but I also feel it's important to learn within their ranges in the beginning of one's brewship.
Last edited by Rick on 05 Feb 2016, 21:06, edited 1 time in total.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #3 made 10 years ago
It's probably fair to say that I'm a "hop head" too. By the looks of BIABacus I have to enter the "Alpha" manually, which makes some sense given the variance I can see for quoted Alpha figures on the brew site I'm considering buying from. I guess there's no real way of testing that for homebrewers though, so there's a reliance on supplier accuracy in this case.
From your BJCP link I can see that English IPA is a little lower in the IBU range, topping out at 35, so I suppose that I can shoot for 33 with impunity. I certainly like English IPA so it sounds like a plan anyway. I presume "tinseth" and "IBU" are interchangeable? Looks that way from BIABacus anyway.
That BJCP link looks very useful in any case for someone starting out. My main experience is with kits as far as beer is concerned so I have little experience in this regard, the reference looks very useful.
Much obliged.
From your BJCP link I can see that English IPA is a little lower in the IBU range, topping out at 35, so I suppose that I can shoot for 33 with impunity. I certainly like English IPA so it sounds like a plan anyway. I presume "tinseth" and "IBU" are interchangeable? Looks that way from BIABacus anyway.
That BJCP link looks very useful in any case for someone starting out. My main experience is with kits as far as beer is concerned so I have little experience in this regard, the reference looks very useful.
Much obliged.
Post #4 made 10 years ago
IBU is a bitterness unit. Tinseth, Rager, Garetz ... they all calculate IBU, just using different formulas.
The BIABacus uses Tinseth, but a book like Brewing Classic Styles uses the Rager IBU calculation. These are the two I see most often used, and there is variation between them. I've chosen to use Tinseth, simply because the BIABacus uses it. After much experience, I know what I will get using it. If i suddenly decided to switch to Rager, I wouldn't be as comfortable ... so the general idea is to research which you might want to use and stick with it to keep from having to relearn through trial and error.
Then you have HBU, which is Homebrew Bitterness Units. Some folks like that one ... but I dont' see it very often either.
The BIABacus uses Tinseth, but a book like Brewing Classic Styles uses the Rager IBU calculation. These are the two I see most often used, and there is variation between them. I've chosen to use Tinseth, simply because the BIABacus uses it. After much experience, I know what I will get using it. If i suddenly decided to switch to Rager, I wouldn't be as comfortable ... so the general idea is to research which you might want to use and stick with it to keep from having to relearn through trial and error.
Then you have HBU, which is Homebrew Bitterness Units. Some folks like that one ... but I dont' see it very often either.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From United States of America
-
Post #5 made 10 years ago
Not sure if that is a typo EsquidEsquid wrote:BIABacus PR 1.0
You should ideally be using Pre release 1.3T. You can find links to this in the welcome posts that Joshua often welcomes newcomers in.
Just give us a shout if you are struggling with anything.
Last edited by mally on 06 Feb 2016, 02:29, edited 1 time in total.
G B
I spent lots of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I squandered
I've stopped drinking, but only when I'm asleep
I ONCE gave up women and alcohol - it was the worst 20 minutes of my life
I spent lots of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I squandered
I've stopped drinking, but only when I'm asleep
I ONCE gave up women and alcohol - it was the worst 20 minutes of my life
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Great Britain
-
Post #6 made 10 years ago
Cut and pasted so can't be a typo. Not a big deal for now though since I'm not quite ready to brew yet. I'll look for the pre release at some point soon.
Post #7 made 10 years ago
If anyone needs the Current Link
.....download/file.php?id=3265
FWIW.
FWIW.
Last edited by joshua on 06 Feb 2016, 05:00, edited 1 time in total.
Honest Officer, I swear to Drunk, I am Not God.
-
- SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From United States of America
-
