Why Lager Over Ale

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

barkdadof4

New Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have a general question.

Why did the beer industry pick a Lager over an Ale.

Here is why I ask Lager's are
Harder to ferment
Longer to ferment
Harder to hide flaws in the water

Just the first three off the top of my head. These all lead to higher costs in production. Also most of the German coming over to the Americas at the time were use to open fermentations.

Just a curious home brewer.
Thanks
 
I have a general question.

Why did the beer industry pick a Lager over an Ale.

Here is why I ask Lager's are
Harder to ferment
Longer to ferment
Harder to hide flaws in the water

Just the first three off the top of my head. These all lead to higher costs in production. Also most of the German coming over to the Americas at the time were use to open fermentations.

Just a curious home brewer.
Thanks

It really doesn't work that way, it wasn't the beer industry that picked one over the other. It was consumers who preferred one over the other, causing beer brewers to invest in developing the best way to make the lagers that were preferred by the consumer. Consumers don't care what is easier to make, they will buy what they like the best, and the brewers have to find a way to make what the consumer wants, or the competition will.
 
I'm not sure that making lagers on a large scale is that much more expensive than ales. You basically just need more tank space, which is an up-front cost but doesn't carry on so much during production once the tanks are purchased. I guess there's more overhead for the larger storage area required, but you can turn out just as much beer as an ale producer, even if the grain-to-packaging time is 30 days instead of 15, just by doubling the overall volume of your fermenters. You would also need to brew half as often to make the same volume of beer, which could end up saving money.

It is more expensive for a smaller brewery that focuses on ales to do the occasional lager, just because they probably don't have the dedicated tank-space for storing lagers.
 
Why some people prefer lagers over ales has to do with their taste preferences, as well as their ideas of what "beer" should be.

Just like some people may prefer sausage over pepperoni on their pizzas.

Lagers aren't any harder to make than ales.
 
I have a general question.

Why did the beer industry pick a Lager over an Ale.

Here is why I ask Lager's are
Harder to ferment
Longer to ferment
Harder to hide flaws in the water

Just the first three off the top of my head. These all lead to higher costs in production. Also most of the German coming over to the Americas at the time were use to open fermentations.

Just a curious home brewer.
Thanks

That looks like a pretty good list of reasons *for* lager. Higher barriers to entry for new competitors.
 
To quote Fritz Maytag, " the (lager) beer was better, it was cleaner in its character almost certainly and the American public surely appreciated that"
 
Lagers have their place, for sure, but I still dig ales over them. Especially for hoppy beers. IPL's just don't do it for me. It's too smooth!

With that said a smooth lager for the summer time is much better than a blonde ale or cream ale. That smoothness just hits the spot on a hot muggy swampy NoVa summer day.

As long as you have the setup lagers are the same to ferment as an ale. They just need twice as long to condition as an ale but if you're setup to do lagers, like someone else said, it's all just up front cost of the equipment. I don't really think the beer industry chose lagers over ales, these days anyway, I just think it's what a lot of the traditional breweries over seas were making and that was deemed "real" beer. I think these days though ales have taken over due to the big "craft" beer scene.
:off: Just for the record I have a firm dislike for the tag "craft" in the "craft beer" label to distinguish non bmc beers. Brewing is a craft in general; it's all beer dammit.
 
I have a general question.

Why did the beer industry pick a Lager over an Ale.

Here is why I ask Lager's are
Harder to ferment
Longer to ferment
Harder to hide flaws in the water

Just the first three off the top of my head. These all lead to higher costs in production. Also most of the German coming over to the Americas at the time were use to open fermentations.

Just a curious home brewer.
Thanks

Depending on the time-line in question, the answer is different. E.g. in the past 20 years 99% of new beers to the market have been ales (my unofficial guess, but I"m guessing its pretty close).
 
I see a trend in beer flavor focus between ales and lagers. It appears that more malt-focused beers tend to be brewed with lager or clean ale yeasts. Hoppier and more bitter beers tend to be made with more estery ale yeasts. I realize this is not a firm finding, but I'm throwing it out there for consideration.
 
Ok this really cleared things up, Not really I was hoping for something I or people around me did not already have in mind.

One thing I would like to point out to broadbill is that Lagers have over 90% of the market today and this just recently started to change. If you go 20 years they would have over 99%. The Miller's, Bud's and Coors's plus a lot of small ones have owned the market and still have the majority. These beers are all Lagers.

I just can't help but think there is some obvious reason that Lagers came to the front.

Summer time was mention well that has two issues; one you would need to have ice to create a lager; two most of the beer was made in the north were summers are short. Maybe this answered the earlier comment.

Costs you always have hidden cost when it takes longer to get a product to market and in a production case this would hurt the company.

Choice -- I really don't that back in the days consumers were given a lot of choices when products came to market. And along these lines why did it take the American public 100 years to figure out that ales have a better taste and more variety that lagers.


Again Thanks for the input, this keeps getting discussed in a couple of home brew clubs I belong to, so I thought I would try a larger audience for some insight.
 
Beer was we know it was introduced to us mainly by German and central european immigrants who set up breweries making the beer they were used to mainly lagers in both pilsner and other forms.

Llook at the names of the breweries that were big in America before prohibition- Pabst, Fleischmann's, Anheuser-Busch, Schlitz, etc etc. Beer in the states started out as an Ale affair, but by the turn of the century the industry had become dominated by Germans.

AFAIK, it was the German-Americans who started industrial scale brewing in America as opposed to the small time local breweries that made Anglo-American style ales.
 
Beer was we know it was introduced to us mainly by German and central european immigrants who set up breweries making the beer they were used to mainly lagers in both pilsner and other forms.



Llook at the names of the breweries that were big in America before prohibition- Pabst, Fleischmann's, Anheuser-Busch, Schlitz, etc etc. Beer in the states started out as an Ale affair, but by the turn of the century the industry had become dominated by Germans.



AFAIK, it was the German-Americans who started industrial scale brewing in America as opposed to the small time local breweries that made Anglo-American style ales.


Exactly, and because they were larger industrial Brewers, the quality was much higher than the tiny local breweries, it was very unlike today's beer climate. Back then this was simply a better option. And there is much documentation that the American people wanted cleaner smoother beer. A bottle of Budweiser was actually very expensive and reserved for the wealthy in the late 19th century.
 
One analysis I've read suggests that the overwhelming dominance of lagers in the US market traces to the post-prohibition goal of getting beer back into homes, which meant appealing to the (primarily) women who would be buying it. Whether through market research or assumption, this drove production to light, low-flavor, lower-alcohol beers.
 
Didn't the rise of the light lager have a lot to do with prohibition and WWII? When prohibition was enacted breweries had to switch over to making "near beer", malt syrup, cola's, root beer, etc. When prohibition was repealed in 1933 breweries could start making beer again, however not long after that WWII happened. During the war grain was rationed forcing brewers to use adjuncts such as corn and rice in the beer. During WWII the government requested that 15% of all beer production be diverted to the armed services, which in turn lead to the growth of Anheuser-Busch, Coors, etc.

These breweries used large industrial processes and cheap ingredients to make the typical light lager (technically a pilsner) that became synonymous with American beer for so long. The US had lots of styles of beer before all of this happened, so I guess blame Hitler?
 
I'm sure the answer is multifaceted. There's also the greater availability of clear beer glasses starting in the early 19th century which caused consumers to become more aware of the appearance of their beer. Before this, beer was mostly a darker variety served in opaque vessels. It was only the aristocracy that could afford glassware. When light-colored beer appeared in clear glasses, it was as big a novelty back then as color television, video recorders, computers, LCD screens, and cellphones have been in modern times. Everybody wanted it. It was the rage. Dark beers declined in popularity.

This applies to continental European beer culture, and it was principally the German immigrants who were America's brewers in the 19th and early 20th centuries.
 
I'm sure the answer is multifaceted. There's also the greater availability of clear beer glasses starting in the early 19th century which caused consumers to become more aware of the appearance of their beer. Before this, beer was mostly a darker variety served in opaque vessels. It was only the aristocracy that could afford glassware. When light-colored beer appeared in clear glasses, it was as big a novelty back then as color television, video recorders, computers, LCD screens, and cellphones have been in modern times. Everybody wanted it. It was the rage. Dark beers declined in popularity...

Interesting historical perspective there, I had never heard of that before!:tank:
 
And along these lines why did it take the American public 100 years to figure out that ales have a better taste and more variety that lagers.

Better taste? I don't think so. Fuller flavor may be a better descriptor but that doesn't mean better. And maybe ales do have more variety, but 18 different styles of lager is more than enough to satisfy most any tastes.

Also, do keep in mind that lager is not tied to refrigeration in process. Many lagers originated through use of caves/cellars that maintained themselves at a constant 54*F year round. A method Pilsner Urquell employs to this day.

Ice was not needed to produce lagers. It was needed to ship it across distances.
 
Cold cellars/caves require Lager yeasts. Early mass production benefitted from "free" cold/cool storage underground.

The Yuengling brewery in Pottsville PA was built there because it had massive underground caves/cellars and good water for brewing.
 
Beer was we know it was introduced to us mainly by German and central european immigrants who set up breweries making the beer they were used to mainly lagers in both pilsner and other forms.

Llook at the names of the breweries that were big in America before prohibition- Pabst, Fleischmann's, Anheuser-Busch, Schlitz, etc etc. Beer in the states started out as an Ale affair, but by the turn of the century the industry had become dominated by Germans.

AFAIK, it was the German-Americans who started industrial scale brewing in America as opposed to the small time local breweries that made Anglo-American style ales.

Just my opinon, but
  • Lots of German immigrants in the US
  • Cooler northern climates
  • industrial scale production - The industrial revolution in full swing
  • tight quality control (consistent products)
  • railroads for widespread distribution
All started happening in the late 1800s.

Before that I had to buy whatever was made locally, from whoever was making it, whether it was good or bad. Now, I could buy an consistently solid beer made hundreds of miles away, for a good price.
 
All started happening in the late 1800s.

Before that I had to buy whatever was made locally, from whoever was making it, whether it was good or bad. Now, I could buy an consistently solid beer made hundreds of miles away, for a good price.

You were buying beer before the late 1800's?! Just how old are you?
 
You were buying beer before the late 1800's?! Just how old are you?

I was transporting the reader into the identity of a poor, working class coal miner from Wheeling, WV who was sick of drinking moonshine. He also had issues with the local ales produced using water straight out of the Ohio River. The first time he had a clean, crisp lager from Milwaukee, it was a straight up epiphany.

But - thanks for ruining my attempt at creating literary prose..... I should have remembered where I was. :D
 
Yeah, who knows if it's true ;)

What part? We know for a fact that a few hundred years ago light colored beer was not possible - the malts weren't there. Pilsner and Stout malts weren't around until the industrial revolution. Before that, everything was malted over wood fires.

Clear beer wasn't a thing until people understood yeast biology enough to isolate pure cultures. Hell, even champagne was cloudy from yeast back then.
 
What part? We know for a fact that a few hundred years ago light colored beer was not possible - the malts weren't there. Pilsner and Stout malts weren't around until the industrial revolution. Before that, everything was malted over wood fires.

Clear beer wasn't a thing until people understood yeast biology enough to isolate pure cultures. Hell, even champagne was cloudy from yeast back then.

I'll note that "dark beer" does not mean "lager." There are tons of lagers that are dark such as bocks (which can range in color from light to jet black; doppelbocks are especially dark), dunkels (which are generally very dark), marzens (which are oftentimes dark brown or amber), schwarzbier (which are usually as black as stouts), and more. Likewise, "light beer" does not mean "lager" as there are tons of clear, light-colored ales such as pale ales, biere de gardes, IPAs, blonde ales, and on and on. For clarity, you can make ales and lagers equally clear.

I think the clear flavor of lagers is a big factor in its popularity, not its color.
 
I'll note that "dark beer" does not mean "lager." There are tons of lagers that are dark such as bocks (which can range in color from light to jet black; doppelbocks are especially dark), dunkels (which are generally very dark), marzens (which are oftentimes dark brown or amber), schwarzbier (which are usually as black as stouts), and more. Likewise, "light beer" does not mean "lager" as there are tons of clear, light-colored ales such as pale ales, biere de gardes, IPAs, blonde ales, and on and on. For clarity, you can make ales and lagers equally clear.



I think the clear flavor of lagers is a big factor in its popularity, not its color.


Well yes, but I believe we are discussing American lagers to be relevant to the topic, so we are mostly talking about light beers
 
Well yes, but I believe we are discussing American lagers to be relevant to the topic, so we are mostly talking about light beers

Yes, but it's not like there weren't light ales in American before lagers got popular with the advent of refrigeration. I think that color is irrelevant to why lagers are popular.

Someone said something like "it took 100 years for Americans to discover that ales taste better" or some nonsense like that, but it's lagers' clean taste and refreshing character that made them more popular. You'll find that lagers are not just the most popular beer in the US, but also in the world.
 
Yes, but it's not like there weren't light ales in American before lagers got popular with the advent of refrigeration. I think that color is irrelevant to why lagers are popular.

Someone said something like "it took 100 years for Americans to discover that ales taste better" or some nonsense like that, but it's lagers' clean taste and refreshing character that made them more popular. You'll find that lagers are not just the most popular beer in the US, but also in the world.


Yes I agree, just because the American craft beer movement is ale-centric, doesn't make ales better. They're just easier, especially on the small scale
 
Why some people prefer lagers over ales has to do with their taste preferences, as well as their ideas of what "beer" should be.

Just like some people may prefer sausage over pepperoni on their pizzas.

Lagers aren't any harder to make than ales.

Isn't pepperoni a sausage? :mug:
 
Lagers being "harder" is a homebrewers perspective. On a commercial scale, the biggest difference is turn around time for a batch to be ready for packaging. It is not substantially harder to make a lager vs. an ale when you have temp control.

I think several folks got it right from the historical perspective. I live on the west coast where my family (and many other immigrants) came from Germany. When they got to California they wanted to make lagers like they did back home but they did not have temp control and created Steam Beer (not just Anchor brewery but there were others at the time).

The brewers that lived in colder climates in the US made lagers the way they wanted to... the way generations of consumers expected them to taste.

You also have to remember, Cascade Hops and Cal Ale yeast were revolutionary in most of our lifetimes... and were not very popular when many beer drinking folks first tasted these ales.

So, yes it would be a poor business decision to try to open a Macro Lager Brewery today and try to create a new brand with a product that takes longer to make (than ales) and competes on price.

I'm glad I started brewing lagers... my ales are better for it. And I have fallen in love with some new styles. Right now I have a SMaSH beer with 100% Pils and Mosaic hops (34/70 yeast). That is the simplest recipe I've ever brewed and it is one of the best beers I've ever had.

Oktoberfest and Baltic Porter are fantastic too.

I may never brew a Light American Lager but there is so much more to lagers than that (just not on the Macro scale... but who cares about them anyway).
 
I have a general question.

Why did the beer industry pick a Lager over an Ale.

Here is why I ask Lager's are
Harder to ferment
Longer to ferment
Harder to hide flaws in the water

Just the first three off the top of my head. These all lead to higher costs in production. Also most of the German coming over to the Americas at the time were use to open fermentations.

Just a curious home brewer.
Thanks

I think it is a very good question. Even on commercial scale lagers have similar difficulties (more yeast required, refrigeration temperatures required, more control over process required etc.).

There are several mostly historical reasons.

Lagers took over US largely in second half of 19th century (Anheuser-Busch, Miller, Coors etc.). Prior to that US was mostly Ale dominated country (due to Brittish Ale influence) and even in Europe ales were dominant. Czech/German Pilzen became very popular in mid-1800s in Europe, due to its clean, refreshing taste.

Unrests in Germany sent a lot of German immigrants to US, many settling in midwest.

Industrialization took off in late quarter of 19th century allowing for automation, refrigeration, efficient bulk transportation and overall scaling up of production.

This period coincided with temperance movement (too many men were basically drunk all the time) which eventually lead to prohibition - many protestant churches lead the movement but lutherans, and especially immigrants, did not find as many problems with their own moderate drinking.

This created ideal "perfect" storm for German immigrants to start up brewing business - it's no coincidence that most major brewing operations were owned by German immigrants (Annhauser, Busch, Miller, Pabst, Coors, Blatz, Schmitz - all German immigrants). And German immigrants brewed Lager because of their heritage and because the Pilzen (Pilsner) style was taking over Europe, so it was both heritage and fashion.

Ice blocks from Milwaukee and eventual discovery of refrigeration made lagering and transportation on ice easier.

Lagers had crisper, cleaner, refreshing taste that appealed to a broader cross-section of population. It was more drinkable and thirst-quenching especially in hot summers.

Development of clear drinking glass in mid-19th century and the fact that lagers are usually more clear and sediment-free, meant it was more appealing to the public. Pilsners were also lighter in color than typical British-style ale of the time, and it was relative novelty as well.

Lower-ABV made them more appealing than whiskey or other strong drinks during temperament movement.

Lagers had longer shelf-life and could be more consistent if done properly (less eastery than warm-fermented ales).
Ales could have been easier to brew which meant a greater variability in quality - while Lager required some skills and original investment, but also meant a consistently more superior, more unique and original product.

Lagering with ice blocks results in more consistent product than brewing an Ale without temperature control and allowing temperature to fluctuate in midwest summer, for example.
 
55x11 gave a good part of the history. Here's an OLD post of mine, for further reference about this for America, you really want to read Maureen Ogle's book "Ambitious Brew"

This was a response to one of those ubiquitous "BMC is bad, adjuncts are bad, the people who drink BMC are dumb, and BMC was the product of corporate mind control/evil" threads that pop up every day on here.

The sad thing is that most people DON'T know the history of brewing in America, and the history of the styles we drink, and expecially like 55x11 said, how much prohibition affected what we drink, what we buy, AND the history of homebrewing in the states.

We also know little about why we eat what we eat,( like why we don't eat horse, or in India they don't eat cows,) and what factors influenced that.

To me it's fascinating...and to me it's sad how much bashing is done of things based on ignorance of that history.

But that actually comes from ignorance, non on the historical fact and the reasons why it was and is used in those styles today.

They aren't using rice and corn because it is cheap, but because it is necessary to make that style of beer. You can't make a light lager without adding an adjunct like that to provide fermentables and thin out the body to achieve that light fruitiness.

It wasn't done HISTORICALLY to cut costs, NOR is it done that way today to cut costs. It's done because that's what's needed to make that style of beer.

just like you add corn in a cream ale, or you add sugar in a beligian beer. We don't ***** about that do we? We understand it is necessary to get the right alcoholic content and the body....

Try to make a light lager without any rice or corn. :rolleyes:

The whole history of the light lager is the American populace's (not the brewer's) desire to have a lighter beer to drink, which forced the German brewers to look at adding adjuncts like corn and rice...not as the popular homebrewer's myth has been to make money by peddling and "inferior commercial product" by adding adjuncts, but in order to come up with a style of beer that the American people wanted.

Maureen Ogle proved that in Ambitious Brew it actually made the cost of a bottle of Budweiser cost around 17.00/bottle in today's dollars. Gee I've paid 17 dollars for a bomber of beer before...not too much difference there, eh?

When AH released Budweiser with it's corn and rice adjuncts in the 1860's it was the most expensive beer out there; a single bottle retailed for $1.00 (what would equal in today's Dollars for $17.00) this was quite difference when a schooner of beer usually cost a nickel.

This is the part that blows the "cost cutting" argument out of the water. In order to use those adjuncts you have to process them separately from the rest of the mash, and then add it to the mash. You either have to do a cereal mash to pr-gelatinize them or you have to roll them with heat to make them flaked...either way, besides the labor and energy involved to grow and harvest those plants, you expend labor and energy to make them usuable. You have to boil them in a cereal mash. That's another couple hours of labor and energy involved in the cost of the product.

It wasn't done to save money, it was done because heavy beers (both english style Ales and the heavier Bavarian malty beers) were not being drunk by American consumers any more. Beer initally was seen around the world as food (some even called it liquid bread), but since America, even in the 1800's was a prosperous nation compared to the rest of the world, and americans ate meat with nearly every meal, heavy beers had fallen out of favor...


And American 6-row Barley just made for heavy, hazy beer.

The American populace ate it up!

The market WAS in a sense, craving light lagers...The German brewers didn't want to make the switch. They were perfectly happy with their bocks and all those other great heavy German Beers. But the rest of us weren't into it.

Bush and other German Brewers started looking at other styles of Beers, and came upon Karl Balling and Anton Schwartz's work at the Prague Polytechnic Institute with the Brewers in Bohemia who when faced with a grain shortage started using adjuncts, which produced the pils which was light, sparkly and fruity tasting...just the thing for American tastebuds.

So the brewers brought Schwartz to America where he went to work for American Brewer Magazine writing articles and technical monographs, teaching American brewers how to use Rice and Corn...

The sad moral of the story is....The big corporate brewers did not foist tasteless adjunct laced fizzy water on us, like the popular mythology all of us beersnobs like to take to bed with us to feel all warm and elitist....it was done because our American ancestors wanted it. Or to save money.

Listen to this from Basic Brewing;
November 30, 2006 - Ambitious Brew Part One
We learn about the history of beer in the USA from Maureen Ogle, author of "Ambitious Brew - The Story of American Beer." Part one takes us from the Pilgrims to Prohibition.
Listen to Part 1

December 7, 2006 - Ambitious Brew Part Two
We continue our discussion about the history of beer in the USA with Maureen Ogle, author of "Ambitious Brew - The Story of American Beer." Part two takes us from Prohibition to the present day.
Listen to part 2
 
55x11 gave a good part of the history. Here's an OLD post of mine, for further reference about this for America, you really want to read Maureen Ogle's book "Ambitious Brew"

This was a response to one of those ubiquitous "BMC is bad, adjuncts are bad, the people who drink BMC are dumb, and BMC was the product of corporate mind control/evil" threads that pop up every day on here.

The sad thing is that most people DON'T know the history of brewing in America, and the history of the styles we drink, and expecially like 55x11 said, how much prohibition affected what we drink, what we buy, AND the history of homebrewing in the states.

We also know little about why we eat what we eat,( like why we don't eat horse, or in India they don't eat cows,) and what factors influenced that.

To me it's fascinating...and to me it's sad how much bashing is done of things based on ignorance of that history.



This is exactly what I was talking about when I said that Budweiser was a LUXURY! Believe it or not, the American people were crying out for a beer like this. *this is Budweiser mind you, not bud light, that wasn't created for evil purposes either, the populace wanted a low-calorie beer*

Summary: BMC did not start as an evil empire, it may be now(if you feel that way) but it was just doing what the people wanted.

Just because it doesn't suit our tastes, doesn't mean that it didn't at its inception(and still does to many Americans, they might like something else, but they sure aren't complaining about BMC)
 
Refrigeration and storage--both involve large capital costs. If you make a lager that requires 45 days vs. an ale that takes say 22 days, you need twice as much tankage to get the same output. Also, there's those darn beechwood chips! ;)
 
I have a general question.

Why did the beer industry pick a Lager over an Ale.

Here is why I ask Lager's are
Harder to ferment
Longer to ferment
Harder to hide flaws in the water

Just the first three off the top of my head. These all lead to higher costs in production. Also most of the German coming over to the Americas at the time were use to open fermentations.

Just a curious home brewer.
Thanks

Lagers are easier to make flavorless and insipid than ales, thus can more readily be used to create a beer style which has been stripped of anything that any consumer would be expected to have a strong negative reaction to - except for the absence of anything to have a positive reaction to, which can be solved by social engineering, at least temporarily. The result is a Lowest Common Denominator beer, which is also a Lowest Conceivable Denominator.
 
Back
Top