Jump to content
Mr.Beer Community
Sign in to follow this  
BlackDuck

White IPA - 2013 Spring Seasonal

Recommended Posts

"Bbohanon" post=372198 said:

Just tried mine..2 weeks in lbk, 3weeks in room temp bottles conditioning.

What were your OG and FG readings? 2 weeks in the LBK seems pretty short for higher gravity beer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As stupid as this sounds, I did not pull any readings on this first spring batch. I wanted to go "by the book" on this first batch to see what the results would yield. If I had to recommend anything different, leave it in the lbk for 3 weeks min. 2 weeks and bottle was a bit too quick for this one. I have another can waiting to be brewed and I think I am going to add some additional bittering hops on the front end of the brew this go around and leave it in the lbk for 3 weeks this time.
Other than that I I'll actually pull readings this go around. :-)
My Mr Beer brews are more for fun and experimentation than anything else..
:-p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Bbohanon" post=372220 said:

As stupid as this sounds, I did not pull any readings on this first spring batch. I wanted to go "by the book" on this first batch to see what the results would yield. If I had to recommend anything different, leave it in the lbk for 3 weeks min. 2 weeks and bottle was a bit too quick for this one. I have another can waiting to be brewed and I think I am going to add some additional bittering hops on the front end of the brew this go around and leave it in the lbk for 3 weeks this time.
Other than that I I'll actually pull readings this go around. :-)
My Mr Beer brews are more for fun and experimentation than anything else..
:-p

Just to clarify, ALL of my brews are for fun and experimentation!!!
Lol
Brew on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"asnider" post=372209 said:

"Bbohanon" post=372198 said:

Just tried mine..2 weeks in lbk, 3weeks in room temp bottles conditioning.

What were your OG and FG readings? 2 weeks in the LBK seems pretty short for higher gravity beer.

Not really. With a good pitch rate and controlled temps there is no reason that 2 weeks isn't plenty of time to ferment and clean up. The 3 week 'recommendation' is a safe one to make for those that don't have a hydrometer but it's not "necessary". I put that in quotes because some like to use a 3-week cycle for their beers and they believe that 3 weeks makes a difference to them. I don't question that or challenge their belief, but I think even they would agree that it's choice, not necessity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Kealia" post=372229 said:

"asnider" post=372209 said:

"Bbohanon" post=372198 said:

Just tried mine..2 weeks in lbk, 3weeks in room temp bottles conditioning.

What were your OG and FG readings? 2 weeks in the LBK seems pretty short for higher gravity beer.

Not really. With a good pitch rate and controlled temps there is no reason that 2 weeks isn't plenty of time to ferment and clean up. The 3 week 'recommendation' is a safe one to make for those that don't have a hydrometer but it's not "necessary". I put that in quotes because some like to use a 3-week cycle for their beers and they believe that 3 weeks makes a difference to them. I don't question that or challenge their belief, but I think even they would agree that it's choice, not necessity.

+1

Primary fermentation, even in a higher gravity beer, is usually done within 7-10 days. I have rarely had a beer that wasn't ready to bottle after two weeks.

That said, when I took the hydro sample on this one over the weekend and it came in at 1.018, I thought I'd leave it for an extra week or so to see if I get another couple of points out of it. T-58 can be funny that way sometimes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck. Mine sat for 22 days and never got below 1.021.

Trying a bottle this weekend to see what it's like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I typically do 3 weeks ONLY because I typically do a 3 LBK rotation. Most of my beers are ready to bottle in 2 weeks or less. I'll leave them for 2 weeks regardless for "bulk aging". Does it help? I dunno... maybe. Doesn't hurt.

Exceptions would be some Belgian/Saison strains. Some of them are weird and do weird things. I don't trust a 3 day hydro reading with some of them until I move then somewhere warmer and wait a few more days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, i bottled my Spring Seasonal last Sunday after 22 days in the LBK, and the SG had gone from 1.064 starting to 1.020 final.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"pspearing" post=372650 said:

...1.064 starting to 1.020 final.

Welcome to the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I will brew this today, but wait until later to decide on the hops level. Bitterness I'm not worried about, just aroma. I figure I can add a hop tea at kegging time if it's as lacking as some are saying. I've seen Cascade added, does anybody who's tried theirs have any other suggestions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Kealia" post=372229 said:

"asnider" post=372209 said:

"Bbohanon" post=372198 said:

Just tried mine..2 weeks in lbk, 3weeks in room temp bottles conditioning.

What were your OG and FG readings? 2 weeks in the LBK seems pretty short for higher gravity beer.

Not really. With a good pitch rate and controlled temps there is no reason that 2 weeks isn't plenty of time to ferment and clean up. The 3 week 'recommendation' is a safe one to make for those that don't have a hydrometer but it's not "necessary". I put that in quotes because some like to use a 3-week cycle for their beers and they believe that 3 weeks makes a difference to them. I don't question that or challenge their belief, but I think even they would agree that it's choice, not necessity.

I know it can be done that early, I just figured that it was a bit early if he didn't take a FG reading to be sure that it was done fermenting. Plus, I thought higher gravity beers take longer. Maybe I'm wrong about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High gravity beers can absolutely benefit from longer fermenting times, I just wouldn't consider 1.064 or so to be a 'higher gravity' beer. In any case, I certainly didn't mean to pick apart your post. I'm just another schlub on the internet making beer ;)

I've been known to bottle in 7 days with an active fermentation and solid hydrometer readings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dry hopped mine last night. I lost track of time when I brewed. Think its been 17 days so I'll more then likely go 3.5 weeks before I bottle. Works been a pisser. Hope I can bottle next week. Havent bothered with readings. I get what I get around a month. My OG was lower at 1.058 for some reason so if I get over 4.5% and Im pleased with it, I'll consider it a success. It'll get drank/drunk. Just glad to add my opinion to a seasonal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5/17 : Tonight was bottling night, after 3 weeks in the LBK. My FG came in under 1.015 for an estimated ABV of 6.5%, which I think was exactly what MrB advertised. I'll take it. I pitched 2 packs of yeast (22 g) in a double batch (4.5 gallons). I didn't do any tweaking other than dry hopping 1 oz cascades. My fermenting temps were consistent in the low 70s.

I got about 40 12oz bottles, except one slightly truby bottle that I decided to drink on the spot just to see if it was drinkable. Yes, yes it is drinkable. It's actually quite good. Do you like lemon/citrus? Get ready for it. While this is good, it is no way an IPA. Even with the dry hop I struggled to detect any hop flavoring and aroma. The lemon peels really took over this brew. I'm not complaining - it's interesting - but not an IPA. Granted, this initial review was conducted on an immature trub sample so it may not be representative of the finished batch. Still, I think I'm gonna like this one.
[img size=500]http://i1053.photobucket.com/albums/s478/oikoeco/null_zps7c4bfd8b.jpg

[img size=500]http://i1053.photobucket.com/albums/s478/oikoeco/null_zpsc40e3995.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Over four weeks bottle conditioning I put a couple of them in the fridge for 72 hours and I finally popped one open.... I like the aroma (I did it straight up), the color and carbonation but my main concern at bottling time seems to be present in that with the high FG (1.019-20) this beer is kind of sweet with little to no bitterness. Not what I was expecting but still drinkable none the less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I plan on cold crashing. Should I take the final gravity reading before or after the crash?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Spring Seasonal batch was bottled on 5/12, a week ago today, after 22 days in the LBK and with no change in SG for over a week. The tail end of the batch, which included a certain amount of trub, went into two 500 ml bottles. I did NOT prime those. Today I checked them and they are nearly as firm as the ones that were primed. The primed ones were 1 liter bottles and have been in the basement, the unprimed were in a 2nd floor room that's about 10 degrees F warmer than the basement. I'm hoping that I'm not going to have bottle bombs, but if I do they're PET bottles in the basement and the risk of actual harm to anything is pretty low. Glass bottles in the dining room would worry me, especially with 2 dogs, 4 cats, and 2 little kids in the house. Has anyone else had a similar experience with this brew? Or with any beer batch? Is it possible that the yeast "woke up" when I bottled and got back to work on the FG? Between the time and the hydrometer I assumed I was safe, but being mistaken is always an option.

What does the collective wisdom of the Borg think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have found trub bottles to carb faster. I think I read that bottles might carb very slowly even without added sugar. I don't think your bottles will burst, especially in PET. I also think that even with a higher than expected fg, you had little sugar left in your brew. At worst, it might be high carb. RDWHAHB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all: Did your seasonal clear in the keg? Mine is three weeks today, my gravity is 1.017, (I think, new to hydrometer) but still cloudy. All of my other brews have cleared in lbk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine did not clear in the LBK like many others did. But this is does have wheat in it, so it should be cloudy. Mine finished at 1.022 and they have been in the bottle for 3 weeks as of today. Luckily, none have exploded yet. But like you said John, they might end up being high carbed. We'll see in about a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine was pretty cloudy in the LBK, and is visibly so in the bottles. I added 1/2 oz. hop pellets a week before I bottled, I suppose that may have contributed to the haze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hop addition didn't attribute to the cloudiness. I brewed with no additions and it is cloudy at 3 weeks in LBK. I'm cold crashing for 2 days then bottling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Dizzon" post=372888 said:

Over four weeks bottle conditioning I put a couple of them in the fridge for 72 hours and I finally popped one open.... I like the aroma (I did it straight up), the color and carbonation but my main concern at bottling time seems to be present in that with the high FG (1.019-20) this beer is kind of sweet with little to no bitterness. Not what I was expecting but still drinkable none the less.

Pretty much exactly what I was going to post, except I tried one after 3 weeks conditioning. I'm hoping the sweet finish will condition out some over the next few weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had one last night after 22 days in LBK, and 3 weeks at room temp + 48 hours in fridge. This is just one guy's opinions and ramblings.

For reference again my numbers were 1.064 --> 1.021.

First thought as I was pouring: The addition of the little bit of priming sugar woke up the yeast during the carbing phase because I could tell that was carbed higher than I primed for. I always shoot for ~2.5 vols and this looked like a wheat well above 3.0 vols. I'm not *that* good as seeing it, it was clerly highly carbed. (NOTE: I forgot to pout a few ounces into the hydro tube to check the gravity so I will do that on the next one).

Aroma: It's a belgian ;) . Smells like fruit, citrus and a bit of bubble gum (to me). I couldn't pick up any of the citra I dry hopped but that esters from the yeast are so strong that I think I would have to have used a ton to overpower it. That's fine.

Appearance: A bit hazy, which I expected from the wheat base. No issues, there. Good thick, creamy head that was supported by the higher carb level.

Taste: Not overly sweet, even at 1.021 FG. There is a definite hop presence in the taste but it really takes a back seat to the yeast in this beer. The spices are there, too. I definitely get the lemon, too.

To me, it's a solid wheat belgian. Which I'm coming to realize that I'm just a huge fan of. I'm not disappointed, though. I knew was I was getting into with this beer. I keep my beer fridge at 42 as the beer slightly warmed, some of the harshness I was getting from the yeast seemed to mellow a bit. (Maybe you could call it 'tartness').

All things said and done, it's an interesting beer. I've only had one other White IPA and it too was a belgian yeast but it was awful. This is much better, but I'm not partial to belgians so it's not my favorite beer. I am curious to see how it changes over the next few weeks. I have a full beer fridge and a full 5G keg that I just chilled today - along with my 2.5g keg of pale ale so I'm in no hurry to drink this one.

Like most beers, I'll give a few away for people to sample, pour a few when friends come over to taste and eventually get through the rest. I do think that if it attenuated lower the bitterness would have been more forward because I could pick up on it. But 60 IBUs in a beer that finished at 1.021 is not going to taste the same as a beer that finishes at 1.012 or so.

One thing I might recommend for anybody still stuck at 1.020 or so:
Add a little sugar solution to the keg and rouse the yeast. Leave it a few more days and see if you get more attenuation. You just may.

I'll post up again when I try another in a few weeks and see how it changes. I'm going to continue to warm condition these for now.

Cheers.

20130518184129.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine is conditioning in my new keg until June 15th. I'm so afraid that it will be delicious and no longer available for order!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just brewed up my first one this evening, no mods; OG: 1.058


[attachment=13462]image_2013-05-19.jpg[/attachment]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good, Kealia! I'll be popping one open in about 3 weeks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many are getting the slight wheat haze. Even my trub bottle was a crystal clear lite caramel color.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All,

Just checking in to record my measurements. I brewed this batch without modification.

OG: 1.06 (4-27-13)
FG: 1.021 (5-18-13)

3 weeks in the LBK at 68° F

I bottled it up yesterday and will report back once I have me a taste :gulp:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine seems to be getting clearer. I think I'll give it a few more days. (21 days now)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder, had I opened one before four weeks if I would've noticed a bit of haze. It's not a big deal, just curiosity on my part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I brewed mine without modification.

OG: 1.062 (4-26-13)
FG: 1.011 (5-20-13)

I checked the SG after 18 days and got a reading of 1.021. I removed the LBK from the cooler in the basement and put it in a warmer spot upstairs where temps were between 70-72.

2.5 weeks in the LBK at 67° F
5 more days in the LBK at 72° F

It's in the fridge now to cold crash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a quick vigorous fermentation starting on the White IPA I brewed up last night, at 66 degrees today; yeah hah!


[attachment=13469]image_2013-05-20.jpg[/attachment]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"JWB" post=373478 said:

I brewed mine without modification.

OG: 1.062 (4-26-13)
FG: 1.011 (5-20-13)

I checked the SG after 18 days and got a reading of 1.021. I removed the LBK from the cooler in the basement and put it in a warmer spot upstairs where temps were between 70-72.

2.5 weeks in the LBK at 67° F
5 more days in the LBK at 72° F

It's in the fridge now to cold crash.

I did very similar and I got 1.013 I think the few days at 70* helped get my gravity down lower than others did

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine was also very cloudy going into the bottle after 2 weeks in LBK. 3 weeks in the bottle conditioning and they were clear as a bell and WELL carbed. I did not even get any trace of fridge haze with these when they went into the fridge.
The longer these stay at room temp conditioning in the bottle, the better(and clearer more deeper golden-colored)they are getting. I think I am down to 3 more bottles of these sitting around and its a struggle not to slug em down.
I have another can of this to brew up now that my Devils IPA made it to bottle this weekend. Might brew this last can of White IPA up this memorial day once my 5 gallons of Fat Tire clone get bottled up.
Busy beer weekend ahead!
:banana:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I brewed this straight up with no mods, except that the spice bag went in commando after I cracked the coriander seeds. My SG was 1.062 and my FG after only 7 days in the LBK was 1.012. Had pretty steady temp. at about 68 F. Cold crashing this right now and will bottle this weekend! Like most said, not vey hoppy, but sample tasted like a great white ale!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fermented for 23 day's then bottled and let them carb for 9 day's and had to try one. Really disappointed with this expensive refill. OG was 1.067 and finished at 1.01 so it wasn't sweet and the only hop flavor or aroma was from the cascade that I dry hopped with. The taste is smooth and pleasant with no bitterness. It almost tastes like a light beer considering the ABV I'm surprised by that. I can't imagine that additional time conditioning this beer will make it better so I'll just load some in the fridge and enjoy it.

All in all it's an expensive session/lawnmower beer for the summer.

I'll pass on future seasonal refills. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My OG was 1.065, after 3 weeks at 70-72 final gravity was 1.018. This should give me 6.3% abv, which is ok with me. I cold crashed for 2 days and ended with 21 12oz bottles due to all the sampling during fermentation.
[attachment=13504]image_2013-05-21.jpg[/attachment]

4 weeks carb/condition is like torture, I want to drink one know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"mrblase" post=373999 said:


I'll pass on future seasonal refills. :(

I'd caution against judging all of them by this one. MrB has a pretty stellar track record with seasonals up until now, which is why there was so much excitement for this one. As others have said, it's a newer yet-undefined style and I think that having "IPA" in the name set expectations for something like Pliny or .

And, it's still pretty early for reviews on this one to be honest. Time may change the feedback given here.

Just be wary that you don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"mrblase" post=373999 said:

I can't imagine that additional time conditioning this beer will make it better so I'll just load some in the fridge and enjoy it.

You never know. I'd leave at least a couple of bottles to condition longer, just to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tossed my LBK in the fridge for the cold crash yesterday, plan to bottle this weekend.

Despite some of the reviews, I'm actually looking forward to this beer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kealia said:

MrB has a pretty stellar track record with seasonals up until now

Unfortunately this is not the same MrBeer that had that track record. It's new management and they have made wholesale changes to all the refills.

Just be wary that you don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

I don't think I'll regret passing on additional seasonal recipes or on any of the new Cooper MrBeer refills in general. Those that I've tried have been underwhelming at best considering the price. I don't feel like I'm alone in that assessment based on what I've read here over the last year.

I will continue to use the Cooper's HME 3.75 pound cans as they cost as much as a LBK size CMB refill while making twice as much beer and they produce a beer of much better quality IMHO. There are just too many other options available to us small batch brewers to get locked into one companies product.

Again my comments concerning my experience with this refill are based on my tastes. Others may find this seasonal to be a superior beer and that would be fine. It's just not what I expected it to be.

:cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, I get it. There were two seasonals that I disliked but I loved the others. To each their own.

I don't use the refills unless I need to quickly fill the pipeline for others (the friends and family I give beer to) and I don't have time for a full brew day. At those times, for me, the cost-to-effort ration is acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottled mine tonight. Heeding the warnings of others, I roused the lbk a few days ago. Mother nature was kind enough to provide a few warmer days (finally). My final gravity was 1.014. I'm happy, and felt comfortable bottling. (Only my third time with glass)
Cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just took a hydro sample on mine: 1.022 at 16 days in the LBK. I'm thinking that I should perhaps add a TBSP of honey as was suggested earlier, to rouse the yeast. Maybe I'll take another sample in a day or two first and, if it hasn't changed, add a bit of honey to get the yeast going again.

EDIT: The sample tasted pretty good, for what it's worth! Not exactly the hop-forward IPA I was originally hoping for, but definitely a promising white ale. I look forward to seeing how this ultimately turns out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried my first one at 9 days in the bottle last night (because im impatient). I hope the others are better. It was sweet, almost syrupy, and not well carbed, although i expected the light carbonation because i only added half of the priming sugar. Maybe the yeast hadnt finished eatng the sugar. We'll see in 3 weeks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"mrblase" post=374151 said:


I will continue to use the Cooper's HME 3.75 pound cans as they cost as much as a LBK size CMB refill while making twice as much beer and they produce a beer of much better quality IMHO. There are just too many other options available to us small batch brewers to get locked into one companies product.

I have been really surprised that MrB hasnt started selling some of the Coopers kits on this site, especially with so many people doing 5g when they decide that they simply love The Obsession. I too will pick up a Coopers from the LHBS from time to time for those days I want to get something cooking but just dont have the time to do it "right." For a couple of bucks more than a 2g batch after purchasing some L/DME, it doesnt take any more time to get twice as much. Even "The Bad Guys" figured that out and also offer big boy batches. A lot of money is being lost as people upgrade their equipment via other sites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"rippsnorter" post=374316 said:

Tried my first one at 9 days in the bottle last night (because im impatient). I hope the others are better. It was sweet, almost syrupy, and not well carbed, although i expected the light carbonation because i only added half of the priming sugar. Maybe the yeast hadnt finished eatng the sugar. We'll see in 3 weeks

9 days is pretty early. Hopefully it'll condition out in a few more weeks and taste much better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"asnider" post=374379 said:

"rippsnorter" post=374316 said:

Tried my first one at 9 days in the bottle last night (because im impatient). I hope the others are better. It was sweet, almost syrupy, and not well carbed, although i expected the light carbonation because i only added half of the priming sugar. Maybe the yeast hadnt finished eatng the sugar. We'll see in 3 weeks

9 days is pretty early. Hopefully it'll condition out in a few more weeks and taste much better.

This one may need to condition longer than recommended. I noted a general sweetness in my batch when I bottled it last weekend. I'm pretty sure the sweetness was primarily from the yeast and lemon and not from the malt. I'll try one in 2 more weeks but it may need to condition a minimum of 5-6 weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't wait any longer. I had to do it...I opened one up. It's been 2 days short of 3 weeks in the bottle. Nice pour, decent head that dissipates fairly quick. Very clear, I was actually quite surprised in this. It's kind of fruity...it's got something there that I just can't put my finger on. My wife took a whiff and she said it's floral, reminds her of lavender. Unfortunately, she has celiac (gluten free) so she can't taste it. I'm not getting much of the coriander. As for the hoppiness....it's slightly hoppy, I don't think it has the IBU's that an IPA should have, but it there, slightly. I think it definitely needs some more time in the bottle to condition. 3 weeks may be a little too soon for this. I may give this another 2 weeks before I try one again.
[attachment=13529]image_2013-05-24.jpg[/attachment]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to add this here as this thread is more active. I tried my El diablo blanco at 2 weeks in CC. The head was pretty good and I like the complexity of it. The hop profile is a bit lacking for an IPA but (to me) not as much as others are saying. I like a bitter as heck IPA but also appreciate an IPA with a bit of balance.

The issue I am running into is, I keep getting some odd flavor with all Mr. Beer recipes and I have yet to find a way to express it. I don't taste it in any of the dme recipes I have done, no matter what age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woody/earthy kind of flavor? If so, potentially Pride of Ringwood bittering hops. Coopers uses them in pretty much everything as far as I know. Some beers I notice them a lot (the pilsner, the northwest pale ale for sure), others not as much, but they are there. They have a distinctive flavor even when used for bittering that is a bit rough edged. If you can find some Coopers brewery beers in the bottle and try them, you will taste the same exact flavor if that's it. If so, then it is the POR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely the Pride of Ringwood, IMHO. The bottles from the new extracts that I have tasted, along with my exp with Coopers Sparkling (which is a good test, as PoR is the only hop used in that one) made that clear to me. Likely why I'll never buy any of the extracts from here or Cooper's, though I all-grain now so I may not have anyway. Just don't really care for that hop flavor...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PatBattle,

Good observation.

I wasn't aware of the prevalent use of POR hops in ALL of the Cooper's beers. While I'm still an extract brewer I have branched out to using HME's from other suppliers or creating my own recipes with LME, DME and my own hop additions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took another hydro sample and it is now down to 1.021 after 19 days in the LBK, which is what most people seem to be getting as their FG. I'd like to try and get it a bit lower before bottling, though. Ideally, I'd like to get it down to 1.013, which would give me the 6.5% ABV that Mr Beer says this brew should end up with.

My options are to either add a tablespoon of honey to "reactivate" the yeast as someone else suggested earlier OR to move the LBK upstairs where it'll be warmer for a few days.

In either case, it won't get bottled for at least 5 more days because I'm going to be out of town for work.

The other option, of course, is to accept that 1.021 is the FG most people are getting and to bottle it up tomorrow before I go out of town.

Thoughts from the Borg? :borg:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I moved mine to slightly warmer temps for 4 days and am gonna toss in the fridge when i get off this couch. Didnt take any hydro sample yet. When I bottle it tuesday, I'll take an FG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"mashani" post=374765 said:

Woody/earthy kind of flavor? If so, potentially Pride of Ringwood bittering hops. Coopers uses them in pretty much everything as far as I know. Some beers I notice them a lot (the pilsner, the northwest pale ale for sure), others not as much, but they are there. They have a distinctive flavor even when used for bittering that is a bit rough edged. If you can find some Coopers brewery beers in the bottle and try them, you will taste the same exact flavor if that's it. If so, then it is the POR.

I think you have identified it, and I have noticed it in every Mr. Beer recipe in different intensities. I honestly was hoping it was something I was doing wrong because I don't really care for the flavor but really like the convenience of a Mr. Beer batch. I may be on my way to doing all my own extract brews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm not mistaken, the Coopers Ale Yeast that Mr.Beer uses also gives a bit of a woody tasty. The Pride of Ringwood combined with the Coopers yeast might actually give a double-whammy in the standard refills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever it was I was trying to figure out may have been that woody/earthy thing. I made the NW Pale Ale a while ago and remember it had a weirdness to it that had been identified as the Ringwood. I'm not so sure that really like it. If most of their beer start tasting like that, I may have to pass on buying anymore. It will be interesting if everyone else is getting it too. I would think that the first pour comments should be hitting this thread pretty heavy in the next few weeks. Can't wait to hear other opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"asnider" post=374849 said:

I took another hydro sample and it is now down to 1.021 after 19 days in the LBK, which is what most people seem to be getting as their FG. I'd like to try and get it a bit lower before bottling, though. Ideally, I'd like to get it down to 1.013, which would give me the 6.5% ABV that Mr Beer says this brew should end up with.

My options are to either add a tablespoon of honey to "reactivate" the yeast as someone else suggested earlier OR to move the LBK upstairs where it'll be warmer for a few days.

In either case, it won't get bottled for at least 5 more days because I'm going to be out of town for work.

The other option, of course, is to accept that 1.021 is the FG most people are getting and to bottle it up tomorrow before I go out of town.

Thoughts from the Borg? :borg:

I rocked mine a little, then nature warmed it up. It worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"JohnSand" post=374916 said:

I rocked mine a little, then nature warmed it up. It worked.

You literally just rocked the LBK and that was enough to get things going again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I did, rocked it lengthwise. I don't know how much it helped, mine was already under 1.020. But Palmer recommends gently rolling bottles if carbonation is stuck. Putting the yeast back in suspension is believed to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"JohnSand" post=375081 said:

That's what I did, rocked it lengthwise. I don't know how much it helped, mine was already under 1.020. But Palmer recommends gently rolling bottles if carbonation is stuck. Putting the yeast back in suspension is believed to help.

Cool. I gave it a gentle rocking. If it's still at 1.021 when I get home, I'll move it into a warmer spot for a couple of days and then bottle it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"asnider" post=374910 said:

If I'm not mistaken, the Coopers Ale Yeast that Mr.Beer uses also gives a bit of a woody tasty. The Pride of Ringwood combined with the Coopers yeast might actually give a double-whammy in the standard refills.

FWIW, The beers I've made with the DownUnda yeast have turned out cleaner then the beers I've made with the 7g Coopers ale yeast packs from under big Coopers cans in the past. Then again I've been pitching 10+ grams of it in every batch I've used it in, so that might help. I'm not actually convinced it's the same yeast, but who knows, or maybe they improved upon it since I last used it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bottled mine today after a 2 day cold crash and dry hopped 1/2 of cascade the last week. Got an FG of 1.009 for an ABV of 6.812%. Very happy with that reading considering many other numbers by the Borg. Had a very wheat scent to it even with the dry hop. The hops didn't come through at all really. My hydro sample tasted much more like a Hefeweizen than an IPA and was quite hazy. Hopefully that mellows out a bit, as I'm not a huge jefe fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I drank a trub bottle of my modded stuff (with Nelson Sauvon) and it was quite good.

But I'm seriously considering taking my next can, adding 1.5# or 2# or so of extra light DME, and brewing it as a 4.6ish gallon batch with some extra orange and lemon peel, some Saaz for flavor and more saaz, or maybe Goldings or Hersbrucker as an aroma addition and using Wyeast French Saison or the Bella Saison yeast I have here. I think it would make a great wheat saison, and I'd get twice as much beer for only 5 bucks more then I spent modding my first can. It in theory has the IBUs to support this without a bittering addition, especially with a yeast like this which will take it down to 1.005 or lower no problem. (Wyeast French Saison is crazy nuts like that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"MattP1981" post=375283 said:

My hydro sample tasted much more like a Hefeweizen than an IPA and was quite hazy. Hopefully that mellows out a bit, as I'm not a huge jefe fan.

T-58 is a more hefe like yeast then clean IPA like as a yeast strain, the clove/pepper/fruit flavors you taste will not go away, but they will mellow a bit with age. EDIT: It will clear in the bottle, at least the yeast in suspension will, given a few months of conditioning time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"alb" post=375095 said:

The current issue of Zymurgy magazine has an interesting article on how different yeasts affect the expression of different hops. It gets a little technical, but worth a read just to get familiar. Also a good article on blending yeast strains.


http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/pages/zymurgy/current-issue

I think it went into combining different yeasts as well, which is something I've gotta try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have this one in the keg. June 14th will be 6 weeks. Is that a safe bet? I'd hate to chill and tap the whole batch prematurely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished bottling mine.

OG 1.058
FG 1.010
ABV 6.2%

Cold crashed for 3.5 days. Crystal clear. Got (8) 1L bottles and a 20oz. I primed with 1.6oz of booster for the higher end of style. 4th of July I'll try one

Hydro sample was ........unremarkable. But flat beer is always lousy.

This seasonal seems to have quite the range. Im thinking they wanted to cover a broader pallate in hopes of creating a larger audience for the release of the product line. Maybe the future ones will be dialed in a bit more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"losman26" post=375382 said:

"alb" post=375095 said:

The current issue of Zymurgy magazine has an interesting article on how different yeasts affect the expression of different hops. It gets a little technical, but worth a read just to get familiar. Also a good article on blending yeast strains.


http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/pages/zymurgy/current-issue

I think it went into combining different yeasts as well, which is something I've gotta try.

The article on yeast blending is more about adding 5-10% of one strain to cover the weaknesses of the main one you'd typically use. One example is adding something to the chico strain, because it has poor flocculation.

The hops article that addressed the importance of yeast was so technical, there were parts I just skimmed over. You can only see phrases like "hydrolyzed glycolsides" so many times before your brain goes cross-eyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys... I have been following this white IPA discussion for a few weeks now but this is my first post ever on the MB forum. I've got two versions of this spring seasonal going at once and they may shed some light on our high FG issues. I did the EL Diablo Blanco recipe with both cans but used Safale US-05 with one and let it ferment at 62 deg. for 3 weeks ending with a FG of 1.014. This batch is currently in bottles conditioning and tastes like a lemony american wheat out of the LBK. It was clear and had very little carb at bottling. The 2nd batch used the supplied T-58 yeast and spent the 1st week at 62 deg, the first 4 days were very active fermentation. After the 1st week the T-58 began to clear out and I read on this board how many of you were stuck between 1.015 and 1.022 FG So I sterilized a long spoon and stirred the yeast back into suspension and moved the LBK to 70 - 72 deg. Things began to get going again but soon fizzled out within another week so I stirred the yeast back into suspension a 2nd time for week 3. This morning I was planning on bottling so I took my 1st FG reading and got 1.018 :( Beer in the sample tube had little to no bitterness and low hops but was partially carbonated!?... time to get radical. After reading that Danstar Nottingham can attenuate down to 1.008 under the right conditions I was off to the LHBS and re-hydrating some Nottingham. So far no activity in the LBK but it has only been 6 hrs. This is the first time I have ever mixed yeast strains... I will keep you posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thought about the widely varying FG numbers on this white IPA... Is it possible that there is variable amounts of unfermentable sugars from can to can or batch to batch of this MB HME!? Possible poor quality control on this small batch seasonal? :dry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, pulled the first bottle out of the fridge yesterday while talking to the wife who just returned from her short vacation (leaving me to have my own lil brewcation). Took a sip and handed to her without telling her what it was. She really enjoyed it and her comment was "this is like a really good Blue Moon." Coming from her unbiased perspective that means she really liked it as Blue Moon is her go-to mass market beer of choice.

I too thought it was good based on her comments. If I had not done that I probably would have been a little disappointed as - hophead that I am (so is she) - would have been expecting a hoppy IPA. She is use to me handing her stuff without telling her what it is and saying "drink this" and it helps me out as well to be a bit to be more objective and unbiased. I mean, I could call it anything I want on the label - could even be called a "McDonald's Supervalue Happy Meal" for all I care and no one would then complain about it not being a hoppy IPA (and also about not getting a free toy inside).

However, dagnabit, I did want a white IPA so have already picked up the add-ons to make the next one Blanco style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've decided to run with the idea that a high level of unfermentable sugars is to blame for our high FG. I did a google search on restarting stuck fermentations and found that several brewers in other home brew forums are using the diet supplement beano to break down complex unfermentables into simple sugars! One beano tablet crushed into powder per gallon seems to be the dose required. I did 3 tablets into my LBK just to be safe. Also I dry hopped with another 1/2 oz Falconers Flight since this beer will be sitting for another week... Will keep you posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"losman26" post=375999 said:

Be careful with beano. I wouldn't use it unless you are kegging

I have no intention of doing this, but I am curious as to exactly what the problem is with using beano.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you research the use of Beeno thoroughly? We had a member here previously who tried it a few times and it worked with varying results. IIRC the main complaint with it was not being able to control how much it eats up, which could result in a very dry beer.

Edit to add:
A quick Google search turns up a number of articles (BYO and others) about this.

Beano contains the enzyme amyloglucosidase (AMG) and this enzyme breaks down unfermentable dextrins into fermentable sugars. Since enzymes continue to do their thing as long as substrate is present, any residual dextrins in the beer at the time of bottling will slowly be converted to fermentable sugars in the bottle and yeast will then convert the sugar into alcohol and carbon dioxide.

Although you may think the Beano activity is complete when you bottle, it is probably not. The rate of enzymatic activity depends on the concentration of enzyme and substrate and sometimes is inhibited by the concentration of the product. In practical terms this means that the effects of Beano are really obvious at first then become difficult to monitor because the reaction rate dramatically tails off as dextrin concentration falls. So you think the beer is as dry as it is going to get and end up bottling early.

This is a real concern for brewers who make light beers by adding AMG to the fermenter. If you are a large commercial brewery the obvious solution is to pasteurize the beer and denature the AMG. While homebrew can be pasteurized, you would have to bottle carbonated beer. Obviously you do not want to pasteurize before the beer has carbonated because dead yeast equals flat beer. I am not advocating pasteurizing homebrew and consider this solution as a really bad home method.

Basically, your beer may get down REALLY low unless you have a way to heat it up and stop the enzyme activity. Assuming you don't, when you bottle you can expect that it will keep eating sugars slowly resulting in over-carbed, super-thin beers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we're gonna find out first hand then aren't we ;) I'll take a dry IPA over a sweet one any day!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I've not tried it myself and I've had a few stuck fermentations. I've just read enough and heard enough from other brewers to deicde not to myself.

I wish you nothing but luck ,sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally bottled mine after over a month in the LBK, stupid life getting in the way of beer. Got 22 12oz. bottles, the last few got a good bit of trub, and the grains from the pack kept getting in the wand making it drip, grrrr. But, it is bottled, lol. Didn't want to sanitize another lbk, so just bottled from the fermentor, reason for the grain problem, since I tossed 'em in commando. Plus I got lazy and used Coopers carb drops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Abqu" post=375647 said:

"losman26" post=375382 said:

"alb" post=375095 said:

The current issue of Zymurgy magazine has an interesting article on how different yeasts affect the expression of different hops. It gets a little technical, but worth a read just to get familiar. Also a good article on blending yeast strains.


http://www.homebrewersassociation.org/pages/zymurgy/current-issue

I think it went into combining different yeasts as well, which is something I've gotta try.

The article on yeast blending is more about adding 5-10% of one strain to cover the weaknesses of the main one you'd typically use. One example is adding something to the chico strain, because it has poor flocculation.

The hops article that addressed the importance of yeast was so technical, there were parts I just skimmed over. You can only see phrases like "hydrolyzed glycolsides" so many times before your brain goes cross-eyed.


+1 on the technical. Much of it was over my head but I know there are some here who understand all that. I found it interesting, but difficult. The yeast article was more on my level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I tend to agree with the premise that the extract for some reason is loaded with more unfermentables then expected, the problem with the beano is that it's not going to just unstick your fermentation, it's going to likely let it ferment out to bone dryness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"mashani" post=376092 said:

Although I tend to agree with the premise that the extract for some reason is loaded with more unfermentables then expected, the problem with the beano is that it's not going to just unstick your fermentation, it's going to likely let it ferment out to bone dryness.

I agree this is a possible risk, but enzymes don't work infinitely... There must be a low enough level of Beano to get the job done right, but still leave some sweetness. I'm at 1.018 right now and MB states that the el diablo should finish at 1.006, plus I just threw in 1/2 oz Falconers' Flight dry for the Beano to work on. Who knows maybe 1 Beano would have been enough for this... Maybe 3 was perfect... In either case I will let you know. I have 2 more cans of this stuff and I can't take that much sweet beer! If anyone else knows how to get this HME to attenuate down to 1.006 let me know and I will try it.... Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A number of people in here have had luck with warming up the LBK after activity slows down and/or rousing the yeast gently with a spoon to get it back into suspension. I think mashani even noted that this yeast does stall sometimes and then pick back up again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would probably help to know what your O.G. was before trying to hit a target F.G., but it's my experience that if you get to 1/4th of the O.G. then you've done pretty good.

But if you're going solely off of the MrB product page, with a target OG of 1.063 and a FG of 1.006, that's nearly 90% attenuation, which is pretty crazy.

Why would they put that on the product page if it were "crazy"? I can't explain it, but numbers relating to ABV have always been inflated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My bet is the product page got copied from some other product and they just "oopsed" and forgot to edit that number.

I don't see that it will get to 1.006 unless they mashed low and added lots of sugar (which they obviously did not). Unless you use French Saison yeast. That would probably do it.

Of course the beano version above very well could go below that.

My plan is to turn my next can into a 4+ gallon batch of saison, using that very yeast or Bella Saison, which as far as I can tell based on reviews is the same yeast. Just because I can, and I think it will be awesome as such, and it will make the $$ I spent more worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Checked LBK @ 9:00pm last night @ 70 deg and small amount of convection could be seen in the liquid with some yeast on serface. Didn't want to overheat the nottingham yeast so moved to the basement floor @ 64 deg. Checked again tonight @9:00 pm and fermentation was low and slow with a few fine bubbles rising @ 65 deg on cement floor and a thin layer of yeast on surface. I had never gotten this much activity from the previous 2x I roused the yeast, even though I moved the LBK to 74 deg for 5 days. So the Beno has restarted fermentation... Now how to stop it... The plan is to take a FG reading Sun. Night and if it is say 1.010 - 1.012 I will bottle it WITHOUT PRIMING SUGAR. Then I will allow it to build up carbonation to an acceptable level in MB plastics ( which will drop FG closer to target of 1.010 - 1.008). Once carb looks good I will crash the yeast at 35 - 40 deg. And hold there for conditioning until drinkable ( probably 4-6 weeks). I can't stop the beano, but I can stop the yeast. This method sounds more appealing to me then heating the beer to 135 deg F for 20 min to deactivate the beano enzymes. I would love to hear any thoughts or suggestions you may have that may improve this experiment... Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"JPMSVT" post=376405 said:

Then I will allow it to build up carbonation to an acceptable level in MB plastics ( which will drop FG closer to target of 1.010 - 1.008). Once carb looks good I will crash the yeast at 35 - 40 deg. And hold there for conditioning until drinkable ( probably 4-6 weeks). I can't stop the beano, but I can stop the yeast. This method sounds more appealing to me then heating the beer to 135 deg F for 20 min to deactivate the beano enzymes. I would love to hear any thoughts or suggestions you may have that may improve this experiment... Thanks.

I think there's still a flaw here. You mention it dropping to a FG of 1.010-1.008 but remember that you can't control that. It's very possible that you'll get all the way down to something like 1.002.

You mention crashing the yeast, but it's not going to be the yeast that's carbing your beer - it's going to be the Beano. And since you aren't heating it to stop the enzyme activity you're not going to be stopping the carbing process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Kealia" post=376578 said:

"JPMSVT" post=376405 said:

Then I will allow it to build up carbonation to an acceptable level in MB plastics ( which will drop FG closer to target of 1.010 - 1.008). Once carb looks good I will crash the yeast at 35 - 40 deg. And hold there for conditioning until drinkable ( probably 4-6 weeks). I can't stop the beano, but I can stop the yeast. This method sounds more appealing to me then heating the beer to 135 deg F for 20 min to deactivate the beano enzymes. I would love to hear any thoughts or suggestions you may have that may improve this experiment... Thanks.

I think there's still a flaw here. You mention it dropping to a FG of 1.010-1.008 but remember that you can't control that. It's very possible that you'll get all the way down to something like 1.002.

You mention crashing the yeast, but it's not going to be the yeast that's carbing your beer - it's going to be the Beano. And since you aren't heating it to stop the enzyme activity you're not going to be stopping the carbing process.


From what I understand All the beano does is create simple fermentable sugars from complex unfermentables. It doesn't create alcohol or co2 which are the products of fermentation by the yeast. No yeast no carbonation. If Beano were placed in a sterile malt it would break it down into simple sugars, but no fermentation/ carbonation would take place. Which is probably the best way to use this enzyme. Add it to a malt that contains too much complex sugar BEFORE fermentation to make it easier for the yeast to eat, then boil the treated malt to destroy the enzyme, then pitch the yeast. The resulting beer would reach a lower FG because of the simple sugars, but would not be a runaway process. As far as how much and how long to treat the malt... Who knows... Sounds like a great experiment though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:unsure:

I pulled my first pour off the keg last night after 33 days of conditioning. Sadly, my first impression was "this isn't for me." That's disappointing, as I really wanted to like this. Maybe it will grow on me. I'm hoping anyway. I made this straight-up and I do concur with others' reports of a lack of bitterness. In fact, any hop presence seems to be MIA.

I may have to come up with some alternatives when I brew up the 2nd can.


Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm now at 28 days in the LBK and it's only down to 1.020 even after trying to rouse the yeast by (gently) rocking the LBK. I'm going to move it upstairs where it's warmer for about 24 hours and then I'll bottle it regardless of what my SG reading is at that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished brewing mine straight up, 1.064 OG so we shall see how it goes :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something really weird happened with this one.. I bottled the batch in 3 3 liter bottles because I am going to try the tap a draft system on it for the first time. When I bottled it, the color was spot on with what it should be. Now 3 and a half weeks later it is almost brown! What could have possibly happened to turn this beer so much darker? Is it still going to be ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...