Has anyone *actually* experienced problems priming with table sugar?

I've personally bottled dozens of batches with plain table sugar (boiled with a cup or two of water first), and never had any issues with proper carbonation or cidery tastes.

Two questions:
1) what exactly is a "cidery taste"? Are we talking acetaldehyde? Hard cider flavor? Sweet cider? Everybody assumes this is understood but it seems like a bad term unless it is defined.

2) Has anybody actually experienced issues with getting it to carbonate? Mine are generally fully carbonated within 3 days, and excellent drinking within 2 weeks. I've never noticed any superior results using corn sugar.

If anyone has done side by side tests between corn, table, and invert sugar I would love to hear.

I've used table sugar (3-4.5 oz per 5.0 gallons to style) and never had an issue.

When carbonating you generally want something highly fermentable that will leave no residual tastes...table sugar is perfect.

No. I always used table sugar (when I used to bottle) and it was never a problem. I think most experienced brewers know this, but new brewers who must rely on a lot of anecdotal info might still think it's a problem.

The cidery thing probably comes from hooch makers that use sugar as the primary source of fermentables in their beer/bev.

John Palmer's How to Brew (1st ed) said:

Cidery flavors can have several causes but are often the result of adding too much cane or corn sugar to a recipe. One component of a cidery flavor is acetaldehyde which has a green-apple character. It is a common fermentation byproduct and different yeasts will produce different levels of it depending on the recipe and temperature. Cidery flavors are encouraged by warmer than normal temperatures and can be decreased by lagering.

If it is caused by aceto bacteria, then there is nothing to be done about it. Keep the fruit flies away from the fermentor next time.

Click to expand...

That's the source you're asking about.

Originally Posted by John Palmer's How to Brew (1st ed)

Cidery flavors can have several causes but are often the result of adding too much cane or corn sugar to a recipe. One component of a cidery flavor is acetaldehyde which has a green-apple character. It is a common fermentation byproduct and different yeasts will produce different levels of it depending on the recipe and temperature. Cidery flavors are encouraged by warmer than normal temperatures and can be decreased by lagering.

If it is caused by aceto bacteria, then there is nothing to be done about it. Keep the fruit flies away from the fermentor next time.
That's the source you're asking about.

Click to expand...

thadius856 said:

That's the source you're asking about.

Click to expand...

Yup. As Yoop said, "primary source". Using a few ounces in 5 gallons worth of beer will not produce any of these cidery flavors.

xjmox14x said:

Yup. As Yoop said, "primary source". Using a few ounces in 5 gallons worth of beer will not produce any of these cidery flavors.

Click to expand...

I've used pounds in a beer (belgians and IIPAs) without any issue. It's just a big fat lousy myth.

I'm not arguing Palmer is right or wrong because I don't have enough experience or evidence to back it up.

As I said in another thread earlier this week, I'll be putting this one to the test soon with split batches.

My guess is Palmer is talking about using sugar for half your fermentables, which is probably a bad idea anyway. I can't imagine 4 or 5 oz in 5 gallons causing any off flavors. He also mentions corn sugar in the same sentence, so folks talking about cidery flavors from cane sugar should say the same about corn sugar.

I've put a pound of brown sugar into an ESB where I mismeasured by LME, and it tastes great, aside from a touch too much "sourdough"/tangy flavor from the Special Roast.

I've used table sugar in every batch that I bottled before I started kegging. I never had any issues. Myth, busted!

Always used it here too. Never bought into the brew store gimmick of paying out the wazoo for a few ounces of magical dextrose.

It's usually an issue when it is over 30% of your fermentables, NOT in bottle priming. Palmer may have good info, but he's lousy ad communicating it, and causes a lot of fear and confusion. He's talking about people who dump a ton of sugar into their extract batches to increase the buzz, NOT using it properly both as a fermentable and a priming agent.

I use it to prime about half my batches, mostly in Belgians and historical beers. I think it tends to produce finer bubbles, so I also like it of higher carbed beers.

Revvy said:

Palmer may have good info, but he's lousy ad communicating it, and causes a lot of fear and confusion.

Click to expand...

There are also a lot of things in the frequently quoted (and free) 1st edition that have been updated/corrected for the newer print edition. Not sure if this is one of them.

What exactly is the "corn sugar" they sell at brew shops versus regular "table sugar" ?...........

I use it (cane sugar) with no problems ever.

I have no idea if this pertains to carboination or taste in breweing, but check to see if the "REFINED" or "TABLE" sugar is actually cane sugar or if it is from beets.

In certain ways, usually in cooked dishes, there is a difference in taste between the two. Just like with cane sugar vs corn based sweetners in soda, there is a diffrerence in taste (think Dr. Pepper made with cane sugar vs corn syrup..ugh).

bosco

Corn sugar is glucose(also known as dextrose). Table sugar is sucrose.

Glucose is a very simple form of sugar.

A sucrose molecule (table sugar) is twice as big as glucose (in fact, sucrose is a glucose ring plus a fructose ring). By weight though, both sugars contain the same energy and will result in the same CO2 and alcohol (sort of... see below). The yeast will ferment all of these sugar molecules, glucose, sucrose, and fructose.

Glucose (i.e., corn sugar) is easier for the yeast to ferment than sucrose (table sugar). So, in theory, the table sugar would take longer to prime bottles, but in practice I haven't noticed any difference.

BTW, corn sugar contains on average 9% water by weight. Table sugar contains none. So, when you convert from corn sugar to table sugar, use 9% less table sugar by weight.

dstranger99 said:

What exactly is the "corn sugar" they sell at brew shops versus regular "table sugar" ?...........

Click to expand...

Corn sugar is dextrose (monosaccharide), table sugar is sucrose (disaccharide). Sucrose has slightly more "sugar" per weight so you use less of it to achieve the same carbonation. It's theoretically (anectdotally?) a tiny bit more work for the yeast to ferment it since they first have to cleave it into two monosaccharides, but I'm not sure if that's a real concern. I use table sugar to carbonate all my beers as it's much cheaper and always on hand.

Whether the sucrose comes from sugar beets or sugar canes, they should taste almost exactly the same. They're both around 99.9% pure sucrose in the end. Corn syrup contains both sucrose and fructose and is very different from cane sugar.

edit: passedpawn beat me to it by posting pretty much the exact same thing with slightly more precise chemistry! Just worth reiterating that glucose = dextrose.

passedpawn said:

BTW, corn sugar contains on average 9% water by weight. Table sugar contains none. So, when you convert from corn sugar to table sugar, use 9% less table sugar by weight.

Click to expand...

Is this true? I've never really thought about it.

I know that dextrose is hygroscopic, and some googling tells me its more hygroscopic than sucrose?

Sucrose (dextrose+fructose as you pointed out) is C6H122O11, while dextrose and fructose on their own are both C6H12O6. So in the disaccharide form they share a water molecule, making dry sucrose contain a little more "sugar" by weight. But that one water molecule only makes up 5% of the difference in molecular weight, and like you said most calculators assume a 9% difference. So is that extra 4% due to water?

zachattack said:

Is this true? I've never really thought about it.

I know that dextrose is hygroscopic, and some googling tells me its more hygroscopic than sucrose?

Sucrose (dextrose+fructose as you pointed out) is C6H122O11, while dextrose and fructose on their own are both C6H12O6. So in the disaccharide form they share a water molecule, making dry sucrose contain a little more "sugar" by weight. But that one water molecule only makes up 5% of the difference in molecular weight, and like you said most calculators assume a 9% difference. So is that extra 4% due to water?

Click to expand...

I just regurgitate what I've learned. I never did any measurements of moisture content. I probably learned it from Palmer, but I don't remember really.

BTW, Beersmith lists the potential gravity (per lb) of both sugars as 1.046. Hmmm.

While at the LHBS a few months back, I irked the owner by expalining to some neophytes that they did not have to purchase the Belgian candy sugar or syrup to make a good Belgian Tripel. He's a nice guy, a decent brewer, and an excellent beer judge, and at first he really didn't know that one doesn't need to use Belgian candy sugar to make a decent Belgian. It was disconcerting that after I explained the myths of candy sugar that he wanted me to not mention it again so that he could sell more of it to those still in the dark. More things to life than making a few bucks selling stuff to people they don't really need....

I agree that the lighter syrups and all the rock candy looking stuff isn't necessary for a tripel, saison, BGS, etc like you mentioned.

But the various caramelized invert syrups are very similar to what some of the trappist breweries use in their BDS ales.

http://www.candisyrup.com/

These guys post a lot on the site, and they've done some cool work on clone recipes.

Also this: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f12/20-lb-sugar-jar-yeast-nutrient-114837/

norsk said:

While at the LHBS a few months back, I irked the owner by expalining to some neophytes that they did not have to purchase the Belgian candy sugar or syrup to make a good Belgian Tripel. He's a nice guy, a decent brewer, and an excellent beer judge, and at first he really didn't know that one doesn't need to use Belgian candy sugar to make a decent Belgian. It was disconcerting that after I explained the myths of candy sugar that he wanted me to not mention it again so that he could sell more of it to those still in the dark. More things to life than making a few bucks selling stuff to people they don't really need....

Click to expand...

I think you are right when it comes to the lighter sugars, but after doing some research, the dark belgian candi sugars are quite unique. And you can make your own that will make fantastic beer, but you won't get the same flavor as the dark syrup sold. Good, bad or indifferent, the monks used whatever was economic and available to them. But there is quite a difference between home made syrup and syrup/sugar marketed as dark candi sugar/syrup.

I used a lot of plain table sugar in my early days of brewing and never had a problem. nowadays i am a beekeeper i replaced the sugar i used before for honey. Just because i have it on hand all the time.

I've had issues with sugar, but it was because I measured by volume rather than weight and didn't get a good mix in the bottling bucket