Achieving a silky/pillowy/creamy mouthfeel (a la Hill Farmstead)?

[Callacave]

Here is my attempt from post #90. It is now 3 weeks from Brew day. Kegged around day 12-14. Carbing for last week.

Definitely a pretty good APA. I used Denny's yeast, a fair amt of flaked grains, lower carbonation.... all combine to give a relatively full mouthfeel. The water was similar to callacave above (180 sulfate and a bit lower on chloride - 70).

Mine is not harsh..... but, I do agree with the thoughts of going a bit lower on mineral content.... I will likely give that a try next time around..... maybe 120 and 60 perhaps.

There was no dryhop in this beer - all in a hopstand. Might reduce hops in boil/stand and add 2-3 ounces to a dryhop in next batch just to see how it turns out.

I might also up the flaked grains some more perhaps. I think Denny's yeast was a good call for this type of beer. Hops are nice, body is full.... but, it is not sweet or anything like that.

Looks great Braufessor. The only thing that you're missing here in your recipe is the fact that Shaun doesn't use any flaked barley, wheat or anything that we typically use to increase mouthfeel. His recipes are very simple, and typically use Pale and Caramel malt while still achieving this amazing mouthfeel.

Don't take this wrong though. All your detailed info is great, and adds a ton to this discussion. Please keep it up. This is why I love this site!

 

[Braufessor]

Looks great Braufessor. The only thing that you're missing here in your recipe is the fact that Shaun doesn't use any flaked barley, wheat or anything that we typically use to increase mouthfeel. His recipes are very simple, and typically use Pale and Caramel malt while still achieving this amazing mouthfeel.

Don't take this wrong though. All your detailed info is great, and adds a ton to this discussion. Please keep it up. This is why I love this site!

No worries..... If I can find a shortcut to the "vermont style" beer....... I am good with "cheating."

I have been fortunate to get my hands on quite a bit of beer from Lawson's, Hill Farmstead and Alchemist..... I love it all. Anything I can find that gets me closer to that is worth a try.

They talk a lot about the importance of their "well water." But, I assume their well water is actually pretty hard from that region. What do you think they do with that well water to make it "soft."?????

 

[brewmesomewater]

What about maltodextrin? I use flaked wheat in almost all of my brews for general head retention but maltodextrin is what produces the silky mouthfeel. Doesn't take much, add late to boil and I can say the difference is substantial, did two of the same batches one with and one without. Had my beer buddies who own a craft beer bar sample both and everyone preferred the brew witb maltodextrin.

 

[Callacave]

No worries..... If I can find a shortcut to the "vermont style" beer....... I am good with "cheating."

I have been fortunate to get my hands on quite a bit of beer from Lawson's, Hill Farmstead and Alchemist..... I love it all. Anything I can find that gets me closer to that is worth a try.

They talk a lot about the importance of their "well water." But, I assume their well water is actually pretty hard from that region. What do you think they do with that well water to make it "soft."?????

Love all three of those guys. Such great breweries.

I hear you on using those shortcuts. I've done it plenty of times. I know Bissell Brothers out of Portland ME and Trillium from Boston use a lot of flaked grains for their beers, and they're pretty damn awesome.

Yeah, the water thing is a little baffling. You're right the water is hard from that area. Maybe he's RO filtering it? Blending filtered well with straight well? I just can't get past his idea of how he wants his beers...rounded with no edges. That just always makes me think a softer profile, but I could be wrong.

 

[Kiichi]

Just wanted to mostly throw in a thank you for this awesome thread. I will now join the chase, even though I never had the Hill Farmstead pleasure (Europe and all).

Recently did a homebrew collab applying the stuff I learned here. We made a Wit with Mandarina Bavaria and a load of Mandarins, using the other brewers Wit recipe he always uses for this type of beer (including oats and unmalted wheat, sides Pilsner, wheat, and a bit of cara 60) with my modifications. Those were taking a tad off the cara 60 and pushing it to 120, adding carapils, and a touch of biscuit. The first two were truely minute changes, only for depth, but the carapils might have done a bit for the mouthfeel too.
On top of that I did water chemistry adjustments, which he never does. Slight PH adjustment, not wanting to go too far since we added citrus fruit, and conservative amounts of Chloride and even less of Sulfates. Both of those more around what people now want to try after their first attempts. Really careful.
Anyhow, the result was first tried this weekend after 2w primary and 2w in the bottle: What a bloody great mouthfeel. Everything so round and smooth. Absolute success. He, I, and everyone else equipped to judge the difference had a clear mouthfeel winner, even in a side by side with an older bottle (month or so).
I don´t think all of this can go down to the rather small changes in the malt bill. I "blame" the PH, especially for the mash, and the minerals.

Now my trials truely begin.

Keep the PH precise, the minerals low, and cheers!

 

[Colbizle]

Update: I did a split batch 2.5 gal each where the only difference were the hops. The water profile was 175 Sulfate and 100 Chloride.

For yeast I used a mix of 1056 and dregs from various bottles from Maine Beer Co.

Bittered with hop shots, 9mL at 60min (which I thought is actually too much), and then split the batch in two, and added 4 oz of hops to each @ 140, and whirpooled for 30 min. Double dry hopped with a total of about another 4.5 oz for each batch.

Both beers smell amazing, and the flavor is incredible. My complaint is the harshness which could come from over bittering, or the mineral profile. These beers are extremely young, and I just tapped and sampled, so there's a lot of yeast still in suspension.

I don't want to make a final comment on mouthfeel yet, but I'll say it's softer than usual, but I'll make a final judgement in a week or two.

Ph for the beers were around 4.40, ABV is 6.8%, so the alcohol might be contributing to some of the harshness early on.

I definitely think I'm going go with even softer water on my next batch. I think Shaun is using really soft water, with very minimal additions. He describes his beers as being round with no edges. That leads me to believe less is better. For my next batch I'm thinking of going 100 Sulfate and 50 Chloride.

This is a great thread! Keep it going!!!

I experienced a similar result on my latest batch which had the same mineral profile as yours. It came out a bit harsh and minerally. My sister described it as chemically? I didn't get that, but I get what she was saying. However, the beer was incredibly soft, silky/creamy and fluffy? wow what a mouthfeel. But the hops were a little masked. I think we are the right track even if it causes me to experiment and waste a couple of batches in the name of science, haha. My next attempt is going to use little sulfate and moderate chloride and see where that takes me. I still believe mash ph and yeast are massively contributing to the this mouthfeel as well so I think I have those two down.

This is my minneapolis water profile is pretty nice and allows me to pretty much do whatever with it.

Calcium 25
Magnesium 3.8
Sodium 14
Sulfate 26
Chloride 30
Avg. Alk (CaCO3) 45
Bicarb (HCO3) 51
Avg. pH 9

FWIW, I spoke with many head brewers and breweries around minneapolis and a lot of them don't even bother with mineral additions and focus on carbon filtering and mash ph only.

 

[irishrover32]

I experienced a similar result on my latest batch which had the same mineral profile as yours. It came out a bit harsh and minerally. My sister described it as chemically? I didn't get that, but I get what she was saying. However, the beer was incredibly soft, silky/creamy and fluffy? wow what a mouthfeel. But the hops were a little masked. I think we are the right track even if it causes me to experiment and waste a couple of batches in the name of science, haha. My next attempt is going to use little sulfate and moderate chloride and see where that takes me. I still believe mash ph and yeast are massively contributing to the this mouthfeel as well so I think I have those two down.

This is my minneapolis water profile is pretty nice and allows me to pretty much do whatever with it.

Calcium 25
Magnesium 3.8
Sodium 14
Sulfate 26
Chloride 30
Avg. Alk (CaCO3) 45
Bicarb (HCO3) 51
Avg. pH 9

FWIW, I spoke with many head brewers and breweries around minneapolis and a lot of them don't even bother with mineral additions and focus on carbon filtering and mash ph only.

your sister could be picking up a soapy character, iv heard that this can relate to final beer PH if i was you id try get the PH of your beer (un-carbed at room temp) if its low this could be whats causing the chemically flavour. did you use palmers water spread sheet for this by any chance?

 

[Feurhund]

Did you use Amarillo? Some people get a soapy flavor from it. It's a genetic trait like people who taste soap from Cilantro.

 

[Colbizle]

your sister could be picking up a soapy character, iv heard that this can relate to final beer PH if i was you id try get the PH of your beer (un-carbed at room temp) if its low this could be whats causing the chemically flavour. did you use palmers water spread sheet for this by any chance?

I forgot to check the final beer ph. I use the bru'un water spreadsheet for all my water profiling.

 

[Callacave]

I experienced a similar result on my latest batch which had the same mineral profile as yours. It came out a bit harsh and minerally. My sister described it as chemically? I didn't get that, but I get what she was saying. However, the beer was incredibly soft, silky/creamy and fluffy? wow what a mouthfeel. But the hops were a little masked. I think we are the right track even if it causes me to experiment and waste a couple of batches in the name of science, haha. My next attempt is going to use little sulfate and moderate chloride and see where that takes me. I still believe mash ph and yeast are massively contributing to the this mouthfeel as well so I think I have those two down.

This is my minneapolis water profile is pretty nice and allows me to pretty much do whatever with it.

Calcium 25
Magnesium 3.8
Sodium 14
Sulfate 26
Chloride 30
Avg. Alk (CaCO3) 45
Bicarb (HCO3) 51
Avg. pH 9

FWIW, I spoke with many head brewers and breweries around minneapolis and a lot of them don't even bother with mineral additions and focus on carbon filtering and mash ph only.

After having my two beers on tap for a few days I'm loving these. The Citra/Cascade version is a little more harsh to my tastes. The Nelson/Simcoe isn't. Not sure why. Final pH is where I want them, around 4.40. FG is slightly different for both beers. One is at 1.012, which is a little lower than I want, but the other is 1.014. Right in line with Hill's Edward.

One thing I noticed is the mouthfeel is definitely light/fluffy/airy, but not dry. I whirlpooled and dry hopped the hell out of it. I remember reading that the oils from hops can also contribute to mouthfeel. Wish I had a fresh Hill Farmstead brew to compare. Hopefully in a few weeks I'll be heading up there.

I'm think I'm getting close, and from a few previous posts I think going softer is a good experiment, and I'm thinking it's going to make more of a difference.

These two beers are very similar to Trillium's flavor profile. Not sure if anybody is familiar with them, but they're making some amazing beer. I whirlpooled strictly at 140F, and I think I'm starting to recognize that character...super juicy. For my next beer I'm thinking of trying a hop charge at flameout, and then whirlpooling at 170F.

 

[bierhaus15]

Vermont water tends to be quite hard, especially in the north of the state, and high carbonate water will produce beers with softer mouthfeel... less crisp beer overall. For those breweries that do treat their water for hardness, it is often through softeners which add a good bit of sodium... which also helps with a rounder, pillowy character.

 

[Callacave]

Vermont water tends to be quite hard, especially in the north of the state, and high carbonate water will produce beers with softer mouthfeel... less crisp beer overall. For those breweries that do treat their water for hardness, it is often through softeners which add a good bit of sodium... which also helps with a rounder, pillowy character.

From what I've read carbonate or bicarbonate doesn't influence mouthfeel. It influences pH, and acts as a buffer, or more so...how strong of a resistance to pH change. It's mainly for figuring out how much acid or base to add to the mash to adjust the pH, which can affect mouthfeel. I'm sure Shaun is adjusting his pH accordingly.

Sodium does play a role in overall roundness/fullness, but water softeners are more for a household, and not for a brewery. That would add too much sodium for a beer. If Shaun is filtering at all it's probably RO filtration.

 

[zwiller]

Never had a HF beers and only skimmed the thread but I see no mentioned skipping bitterness additions and relying on late/whirlpool hops for IBU. Definitely softer mouthfeel.

 

[Colbizle]

Never had a HF beers and only skimmed the thread but I see no mentioned skipping bitterness additions and relying on late/whirlpool hops for IBU. Definitely softer mouthfeel.

You mean hop bursting with whirlpool?

 

[m00ps]

that's a good point I have noticed in my IPAs with very little bittering charge that they almost have a wheat-like softness to them from 90% of the hops going in after flameout and the silky texture that Conan can produce

 

[zwiller]

You mean hop bursting with whirlpool?

Yes, I think. I don't really recall the exact differences in bursting/standing/whirlpool. But the point is to rely on late (less than 15m) or hopstand (post boil) for your IBU. I've made a few IPAs that the only hops used were a hopstand. Takes a lot of hops but smooooth.

Also, isn't HF documented to use "their own version" of Conan?

 

[Colbizle]

Yes, I think. I don't really recall the exact differences in bursting/standing/whirlpool. But the point is to rely on late (less than 15m) or hopstand (post boil) for your IBU. I've made a few IPAs that the only hops used were a hopstand. Takes a lot of hops but smooooth.

Also, isn't HF documented to use "their own version" of Conan?

Hop bursting essentially means no 60 minutes addition but all late additions after 20 minutes to hit target IBU and aroma.. Example: (1oz@20 1oz@10 1oz@5 1oz@flameout)

hopstand/whirlpool are the same thing. The only difference is pro brewers call it whirlpooling because that is what they do prior to hitting their heat exchanger then to fermentor. Whirlpool/hopstand additions are added after flameout and then sit in there where temps range from 195F to 150F. It is reported that isomerization continues to happen above 175F. So many probrewers will add hops at flameout and whirlpool for 45 minutes around 195F where they still extract bitterness/ibus.

It has been reported that hop bursting and whirlpool bitterness does not taste the same as a 60 minute addition even if both IBU contributions are the same. This makes sense because your not boiling off volatile hop oils and the contact time is less with less heat usually.

 

[Callacave]

Never had a HF beers and only skimmed the thread but I see no mentioned skipping bitterness additions and relying on late/whirlpool hops for IBU. Definitely softer mouthfeel.

It's documented that Shaun uses hop extract to bitter, then I'm sure most of his hops are all at flameout.

 

[zwiller]

Thanks. Seems like each forum has their own spin on these techniques... I also agree that hopbursting and hopstanding taste differently. I prefer the latter in my brews. Even with hop extract, I think he might be getting a larger portion of IBU from hopstanding/whirlpool than one would suspect. This matches my experience, as a hopstand only just does not have enough "bite" alone even though predicted IBU calcs indicate otherwise and are off the chart.

Personally, I've experimented much with water and sincerely doubt there is any magic there but I can attest to yeast making a significant mouthfeel contribution. My fave saison strain 3726 Blauges is well documented to be silky...

Once again, never had the stuff but wanted to chime in that hopping might be another factor.

 

[kaz4121]

Never had a HF beers and only skimmed the thread but I see no mentioned skipping bitterness additions and relying on late/whirlpool hops for IBU. Definitely softer mouthfeel.

I don't think that has as much to do with mouthfeel as it does perceived bitterness, but I could be wrong.

I would agree that hopbursting/whirpooling is definitely at play with HF hop-forward beers.

 

[Callacave]

I don't think that has as much to do with mouthfeel as it does perceived bitterness, but I could be wrong.

I would agree that hopbursting/whirpooling is definitely at play with HF hop-forward beers.

From what we know the oils from hops do create a mouthfeel that is noticeable. Especially from late additions, and using hop extract as well as late hops can produce a smoother bitterness.

 

[Colbizle]

ETF- For homebrewers, what 2 pieces of advice would you give them to produce wonderful wild beers like HF has?

Shaun- Water. Patience.

Old article but I enjoyed it:
http://embracethefunk.com/2012/04/30/hill-farmstead-qa-with-shaun-hill/

 

[kaz4121]

From what we know the oils from hops do create a mouthfeel that is noticeable. Especially from late additions, and using hop extract as well as late hops can produce a smoother bitterness.

Smoother bitterness for sure. But I've had plenty of commercial hopbursted IPAs that don't have a "creamy" mouthfeel.

I do agree that there will be more oils but I'm not so sure how noticeable it is? It could definitely be part of the mouthfeel equation, although a lesser part IMHO. I'd love to read more about the hop oil and mouthfeel side of things if you can point me to a post or article though. Maybe I am underestimating its impact.

 

[Callacave]

Smoother bitterness for sure. But I've had plenty of commercial hopbursted IPAs that don't have a "creamy" mouthfeel.

I do agree that there will be more oils but I'm not so sure how noticeable it is? It could definitely be part of the mouthfeel equation, although a lesser part IMHO. I'd love to read more about the hop oil and mouthfeel side of things if you can point me to a post or article though. Maybe I am underestimating its impact.

It's definitely part of the equation. I can already tell with the two beers I have on tap right now. You're right. There's more to it...water adjustments, pH, yeast.

Can't remember exactly where I read it, but it's been documented and discussed more than once.

 

[bierhaus15]

From what I've read carbonate or bicarbonate doesn't influence mouthfeel. It influences pH, and acts as a buffer, or more so...how strong of a resistance to pH change. It's mainly for figuring out how much acid or base to add to the mash to adjust the pH, which can affect mouthfeel. I'm sure Shaun is adjusting his pH accordingly.

Sodium does play a role in overall roundness/fullness, but water softeners are more for a household, and not for a brewery. That would add too much sodium for a beer. If Shaun is filtering at all it's probably RO filtration.

This is incorrect. Water hardness and carbonate content does impact mouthfeel beyond pH. Narziss and Kolbach both touch on this and there is even relevant work on the matter in other industries like distilling where dilution is involved.

Also, sodium ion water softeners are very common in the brewing industry, especially since RO systems are expensive and can be limiting. Some breweries use ion exchange softeners and RO systems, but most just use the standard sodium ion ones. I've been to a few VT breweries that use these, including one of the largest in the state.

Back on the topic of mouthfeel, I highly doubt Shaun is doing anything remotely unique with his water. We know the water in his area is hard and his beers exhibit traits of beers brewed with hard water. Its pretty simple stuff. A more useful test on his beers would be to do titratable acidity along with residual yeast counts. That would really tell you something.

 

[Colbizle]

This is incorrect. Water hardness and carbonate content does impact mouthfeel beyond pH. Narziss and Kolbach both touch on this and there is even relevant work on the matter in other industries like distilling where dilution is involved.

Also, sodium ion water softeners are very common in the brewing industry, especially since RO systems are expensive and can be limiting. Some breweries use ion exchange softeners and RO systems, but most just use the standard sodium ion ones. I've been to a few VT breweries that use these, including one of the largest in the state.

Back on the topic of mouthfeel, I highly doubt Shaun is doing anything remotely unique with his water. We know the water in his area is hard and his beers exhibit traits of beers brewed with hard water. Its pretty simple stuff. A more useful test on his beers would be to do titratable acidity along with residual yeast counts. That would really tell you something.

I'd personally bet all my money that Shaun is doing everything unique with his water.

Shaun Hill: -"All of our beers have a unique profile - and each are adjusted accordingly. Some are heavier on sulfate, some less. All have chloride. It's a process of trial and error to achieve that which best suits your taste."

Shaun Hill: - "Keep tweaking away... We use whatever is necessary in order to emulate the style in which we are brewing..." (When someone asked: "Would you be willing to share some hints about your well water profile? ").


You say: "We know the water in his area is hard"
I ask: Do we? He uses his own well water. Unless you know something we don't.

You say: "his beers exhibit traits of beers brewed with hard water"
I ask: Explain? What traits?

You say: "A more useful test on his beers would be to do titratable acidity along with residual yeast count"
Shaun says: "I think most of the haze comes from the dry hopping." (When someone asked him why his beers were so hazy.)

 

[Callacave]

This is incorrect. Water hardness and carbonate content does impact mouthfeel beyond pH. Narziss and Kolbach both touch on this and there is even relevant work on the matter in other industries like distilling where dilution is involved.

Also, sodium ion water softeners are very common in the brewing industry, especially since RO systems are expensive and can be limiting. Some breweries use ion exchange softeners and RO systems, but most just use the standard sodium ion ones. I've been to a few VT breweries that use these, including one of the largest in the state.

Back on the topic of mouthfeel, I highly doubt Shaun is doing anything remotely unique with his water. We know the water in his area is hard and his beers exhibit traits of beers brewed with hard water. Its pretty simple stuff. A more useful test on his beers would be to do titratable acidity along with residual yeast counts. That would really tell you something.

Good info, and can't argue with you. I've got a lot to learn in the water department, but I have an interest in it to keep learning. From what I've read it seems like bicarb isn't important, or maybe it's overlooked? Haven't read what Narziss and Kolbach wrote about bicarb, but maybe they're referring to the affect of pH it can have, and how that affects the mouthfeel?

Interesting that some VT breweries are using softeners. Curious to know what else, if any they're doing to their water are the softeners?

This is a great discussion, and it's awesome to just get all the ideas and info out there. I agree Shaun is probably doing something simple, but my gut tells me he's doing the opposite of what everyone else is doing with hoppy beers, e.g.... load up on sulfate, keep the chloride low. He's seems to be dialed into each recipe. No wonder he's one of the top breweries in the country.

 

[Braufessor]

A thought in regard to the role of water...... All of the Vermont breweries emphasize the role of their "well water" in their beers. That water is Hard...... It is not like you get "special" well water out of a "special" aquifer in one spot in Southern Vermont that is different than other places in that region.

Either:
A.) They are lying about their water being important
or
B.) It is really important

Let us assume they are not lying about their water and it really is important. If it is important....... it seems to me that RO filtering is not what is happening. RO takes almost EVERYTHING out of the water. RO water ends up the same, no matter what you start with. So, if they RO filter their water, it becomes the same as any water that is RO filtered anywhere - and thus, nothing special at all.

So..... What about the possibility of not filtering the hard water? When I plug my standard APA into Brun water with my HARD water (260 bicarbonate) ..... it spits out a 5.8+ pH. Now, that is no good..... I know what happens when you brew with hard water straight up - your hoppy beers are harsh and horrible. I did it for the better part of a Decade. But, if I treat my water with some sulfate/chloride additions, blend it down a bit (60% tap water/40% RO) and use about .6ml lactic acid/gallon of water, I can pull that pH down to about 5.42.........

Perhaps they are acidifying their hardwater enough to bring that pH down to an acceptable range. Bicarbonate in hoppy beers is usually something that is avoided. But, we are also looking for something that most breweries are not doing.

That said - I am going to do a bit more digging - but pretty sure this is what I am going to try next. I don't think it is a matter of simply tweaking sulfate and chloride up and down a little bit.

I will be going with moderate additions to bring sulfate in around 100 and chloride in around 60-70.

 

[Braufessor]

Ok - Here is what I am thinking:

60% Tap, 40% RO.

Gonna add some canning salt to bump up sodium (which is know to increase fullness of beer) and mimic a little bit the possibility of "softener water."

Additions:
Gypsum - .4gr/gal
CaCl - .25gr/gal
Salt - .2gr/gal
Epsom - .1 gr/gal

Finished water #'s in the boil Kettle:
Ca = 85
Mg = 15
Na =27
Sulfate = 101
Chloride = 71
Bicarbonate = 175

.8ml/ gallon lactic acid

Estimated mash pH 5.42

Thoughts???? Kind of looking to try something totally different here as other attempts seem to produce good beers..... but not what we are really searching for either.

 

[Callacave]

That looks great Braufessor. I'm gonna do the same thing on my next brew. I was thinking 125 sulfate and 75 chloride

 

[Colbizle]

Ok - Here is what I am thinking:

60% Tap, 40% RO.

Gonna add some canning salt to bump up sodium (which is know to increase fullness of beer) and mimic a little bit the possibility of "softener water."

Additions:
Gypsum - .4gr/gal
CaCl - .25gr/gal
Salt - .2gr/gal
Epsom - .1 gr/gal

Finished water #'s in the boil Kettle:
Ca = 85
Mg = 15
Na =27
Sulfate = 101
Chloride = 71
Bicarbonate = 175

.8ml/ gallon lactic acid

Estimated mash pH 5.42

Thoughts???? Kind of looking to try something totally different here as other attempts seem to produce good beers..... but not what we are really searching for either.

This got me thinking. In bru'un water many believe and even the creator Martin think that the SO4/CL ratio is irrelevant but maybe this is just in higher concentrations? Like for example we know 150/150 would be a 1:1 would be very harsh (I did 175/100 recently and found it too much) but maybe at lower concentrations like 75:85 the ratio is more like 1:1 and the reaction is different.. We know from trial and error Shaun can't be possibly doing high sulfate with high chloride.. so he must be doing some like a 1:1 ratio at lower concentrations? I dunno, I'm Just thinking out loud here and throwing **** at the wall...

I still think this quote is money:
"All of our beers have a unique profile - and each are adjusted accordingly. Some are heavier on sulfate, some less. All have chloride. It's a process of trial and error to achieve that which best suits your taste."

But what is his perception of heavy on sulfate, it must be lower then what most of us think heavy, when I think heavy I think 300ppm which I've gone on a esb with decent results but with low chloride 50ppm.

Also I agree with sodium. I often target 25ppm with good results with all my hoppy beers way before I started chasing the hill farmstead mouthfeel

I'm going to start brewing a hoppy strong ale (i.e. investigation ale / arrogant bastard inspired type beer) here in a couple hours and I'm still debating on what levels I'm going to target. I'm thinking 75:100 but at the same time I feel like that could end up being too much and I keep going back and forth on my adjustments.

With all that said, bru'un waters Pale ale water profile 300ppm/50ppm which I have used many a time.. so 50ppm chloride I know won't give us the mouthfeel we are looking for and I'm not sure 10 or 20 more points will either..(but I could be wrong.)

 

[Braufessor]

mine is in the mash tun as outlined above. Guess we will see what it brings in 10-14 days or so. I went with a basic APA that I brew a lot. 1.055 gravity. 2Row/Maris blend on the base. 4 ounces each of honey malt, cara 20, flaked wheat and flaked oats. Going with Vermont ale yeast (giga yeast version). Bitter with warrior and then citra after that.
2 ounce flame out
3 ounce hop stand at 140
2 ounce dry hop

I generally try to do most of my experimenting on a beer like this because I brew it all the time. It is relatively simple and straightforward. I don't want to F around experimenting on a real big beer or complex beer, etc.

Another totally random thought. Most of those beers we are talking about are cloudy, hazy etc........ hard water makes star san cloudy. Does hard water lend a cloudy/hazy character to beer???? Just a thought as I sit here staring at my cloudy star san......

 

[bierhaus15]

You guys are over thinking this. Shaun is brewing on what is basically a large brewpub system, making 3,000 bbls of beer a year. That is tiny. Breweries that size do not invest money in expensive water systems or the lab equipment necessary to track relevant water adjustments. When I visited the brewery in 2013, there was nothing there that would indicate he had ion exchange or RO. Unless he dumped a bunch of money into a water system, he's using his hard-ish well water and adjusting pH with brewing salts and possibly with acid. And that's a maybe on the acid.

As for ion concentrations, adjusting from 100 to 300ppm really isn't that significant, besides the respective change in pH, when comparative fermentation and brewing processes are completely different. He's using hard water because that's whats available to him. What is really significant to us is processes - yeast choice, pitch rate, oxygenation, filtered/fined or not, beer acidity... these all have significantly more impact on flavor/mouthfeel than how much carbonate or CaS04/CaCl2 is in his beer. Brewing with hard water is a good place to start, but it is not the whole equation.

 

[Braufessor]

You guys are over thinking this. Shaun is brewing on what is basically a large brewpub system, making 3,000 bbls of beer a year. That is tiny. Breweries that size do not invest money in expensive water systems or the lab equipment necessary to track relevant water adjustments. When I visited the brewery in 2013, there was nothing there that would indicate he had ion exchange or RO. Unless he dumped a bunch of money into a water system, he's using his hard-ish well water and adjusting pH with brewing salts and possibly with acid. And that's a maybe on the acid.

As for ion concentrations, adjusting from 100 to 300ppm really isn't that significant, besides the respective change in pH, when comparative fermentation and brewing processes are completely different. He's using hard water because that's whats available to him. What is really significant to us is processes - yeast choice, pitch rate, oxygenation, filtered/fined or not, beer acidity... these all have significantly more impact on flavor/mouthfeel than how much carbonate or CaS04/CaCl2 is in his beer. Brewing with hard water is a good place to start, but it is not the whole equation.

Pretty much what I was trying to get at in post 148..... I agree. I think (guess) they are treating hard well water for pH to get to what they brew with. That is what I am trying to mimic a little in the brew I am going with right now.

I think bicarbonate can have a significant impact possibly. when I brew dark beers I use my very high bicarbonate tap water...... and my porters have a very full, silky feeling to them. I have also read similar in other areas. Perhaps that bicarbonate can also round out hoppy lighter beers if acid is used to offset pH issues....???

Also, I do think there is a rather significant difference when you are comparing 100 to 300 ppm of sulfate for example..... to me, that makes a BIG difference in the perception of the beer. I have played with that a lot and I think I can absolutely tell the difference if we are talking about those kinds of extremes.

I will be curious to see what comes of this beer I am brewing right now..... it is a rather dramatic departure from what I would normally do in regard to overall water profile.

 

[Colbizle]

You guys are over thinking this. Shaun is brewing on what is basically a large brewpub system, making 3,000 bbls of beer a year. That is tiny. Breweries that size do not invest money in expensive water systems or the lab equipment necessary to track relevant water adjustments. When I visited the brewery in 2013, there was nothing there that would indicate he had ion exchange or RO. Unless he dumped a bunch of money into a water system, he's using his hard-ish well water and adjusting pH with brewing salts and possibly with acid. And that's a maybe on the acid.

As for ion concentrations, adjusting from 100 to 300ppm really isn't that significant, besides the respective change in pH, when comparative fermentation and brewing processes are completely different. He's using hard water because that's whats available to him. What is really significant to us is processes - yeast choice, pitch rate, oxygenation, filtered/fined or not, beer acidity... these all have significantly more impact on flavor/mouthfeel than how much carbonate or CaS04/CaCl2 is in his beer. Brewing with hard water is a good place to start, but it is not the whole equation.

"adjusting from 100 to 300ppm really isn't that significant"

Of course it is. My own experiments have proved that big of a swing is very significant. I've even got scoresheets to prove it. What you keep re-iterating about the other control points have already been discussed earlier in the thread. Have you tried experimenting with your own water adjustments? It doesn't sound like it.

Everything I've read straight from shauns mouth has indicated he's very much about water adjustments, to what degree, We don't know, that's why some of us are contributing our own time and money with experimenting in this department and sharing it on this thread.

 

[Braufessor]

So, I ended up with these for pH readings from my post #149:

Mash pH = 5.39
Final Runnings from mash tun = 5.49
Kettle pH at start of boil = 5.42

 

[Callacave]

Keep it up guys! This is great. I won't be able to brew for a few weeks, but I'll be curious on both of your results.

 

[irishrover32]

Pretty much what I was trying to get at in post 148..... I agree. I think (guess) they are treating hard well water for pH to get to what they brew with. That is what I am trying to mimic a little in the brew I am going with right now.

I think bicarbonate can have a significant impact possibly. when I brew dark beers I use my very high bicarbonate tap water...... and my porters have a very full, silky feeling to them. I have also read similar in other areas. Perhaps that bicarbonate can also round out hoppy lighter beers if acid is used to offset pH issues....???

Also, I do think there is a rather significant difference when you are comparing 100 to 300 ppm of sulfate for example..... to me, that makes a BIG difference in the perception of the beer. I have played with that a lot and I think I can absolutely tell the difference if we are talking about those kinds of extremes.

I will be curious to see what comes of this beer I am brewing right now..... it is a rather dramatic departure from what I would normally do in regard to overall water profile.

you raised an interesting point on bicarbonates, iv heard from john palmer alkalinity plays a role in mouthfeel so adding bicarbonates is important, 0-50 PPM is the recommended amount for light coloured beers so i think the nearer you can get to 50ppm the better, im going to try this for my next brew. on my recent brew which is being dry hopped at the moment iv gone with this profile
cl - 82
mg - 10
caco3 - 116
na - 53
ca - 51
sl - 41
RA - 51

it was a darker coloured beer around 13 SRM and the ca/sl ratio gave me a balanced ratio, im interested to see how this effects things as you can see the chloride exceeds the sulfate and is relativly low across the board while keeping the sodium level high with a high-ish CACO3 for a darker beer, i have to say it was the best tasting beer iv had out of the fermentor but i did change my process by not dry hopping in primary which gave me fantastically clear beer with WLP007 after 10 days

 

[g-star]

Interesting thread. I recently had the chance to try several HF beers, and they do live up to the hype. The mouthfeel is unique and helps set these beers apart.

My perspective is that chasing a specific ionic water profile with the hopes of achieving that mouthfeel is misguided. Water is important, but I believe he was referring more to getting the correct mash/kettle/final pH than a specific mineral content. Based on the comments about chloride, I think best practice would be to focus on achieving the correct pH with mostly CaCl2 and/or acid additions. Based on things we know about other famous Vermont brewers, I would say to shoot for a low pH (5.2 - 5.3 in the kettle).

I have to believe ultimately though that the mouthfeel is more attributable to yeast strain perhaps aided by a high mash temp. We know some of these beers have a relatively high final gravity. The unfiltered appearance and the knowledge that they use a house English/Conan-derivative yeast strain seems to support this. Unless they're lying, the posted grain bills show no adjuncts/flaked grains.

If one could get the beer regularly, I would think that a full anion/cation analysis and a successful culture of the house yeast pitched into a simple pale ale recipe would provide a great deal of insight.

Any takers?

 

[Braufessor]

I wonder about 1318 for the yeast??