How to Imperialize and Sessionize Recipes

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.

Weezy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
2,673
Reaction score
624
Location
Pittsburgh
Caveat: This article is my opinion, based on my personal experiences as a homebrewer. I am not an expert. YMMV. RDWHAHB.….and whatever other acronyms might seem appropriate.
Note too that the grain and hop weight and percentages used here are very rough numbers just to illustrate the point.


Threads pop-up all the time with people considering making a session (low gravity beer) or imperial (high gravity beer) version of some beer recipe or general style. I’ve spent a lot of time on session beers and the occasional high gravity ale as well. This article intends to share my experience and ideas in modifying an otherwise normal recipe (say, 1.050-1.070 OG beer) to make it a good session or imperial beer. I’ll be discussing this in three sections: (1) How to adjusting grain percentages, (2) How to adjust hop quantities, and (3) adding or subtracting grains or adjuncts to support the flavor and mouthfeel.


How to adjusting grain percentages

Let’s say your favorite IPA recipe is a 6% beer (OG about 1.060) and your malt bill is:

Regular IPA (1.060)
U.S. Pale Malt 10 lbs. (90%)
Crystal 60 0.5 lbs. (5%)
Carapils/Dextrin Malt 0.5 lbs. (5%)

And you want to make a low alcohol, session version. The first inclination is to jump into your software and ratchet down the OG to, say, 1.045, and let’er rip. Lowering the OG in your software will maintain the ratio of grains (i.e. percentages) and simply adjust the grain weight to get to the desired OG. You’ll end up with something like this:

Session IPA (1.045)
U.S. Pale Malt 7.5 lbs. (90%)
Crystal 60 0.4 lbs. (5%)
Carapils/Dextrin Malt 0.4 lbs. (5%)

Makes sense, right? You need less malt to get to the lower gravity. Yep. But…doing this, and brewing this beer, isn’t much different than just watering down the original 1.060. Imagine taking your favorite IPA recipe and adding a gallon of water to it. You end up with a watered down flavor effect. Not good.

Similarly, say you want to make an Imperial IPA out of that same beer. Again, go into your brew software and ratchet up the OG to 1.085, and you get something close to:

Imperial IPA (1.085)
U.S. Pale Malt 13.5 lbs. (90%)
Crystal 60 0.9 lbs. (5%)
Carapils/Dextrin Malt 0.9 lbs. (5%)

Here, you’re facing the opposite result. You’ve just added 0.8 lbs more specialty malt to your favorite IPA recipe. Your IIPA is probably going to taste sweeter and richer than you’ll like.

What I’ve found to work is to (1) maintain the specialty malt weights, and (2) adjust only the base grain weight to account for the desired change (increase or decrease) in OG. Doing this maintains the same flavor and mouthfeel contribution from the specialty malts/adjuncts, which you don’t want to vary much from big to small versions of the beer. So, our session IPA should look more like this:

Fixed Session IPA (1.045)
U.S. Pale Malt 7.2 lbs. (88%)
Crystal 60 0.5 lbs. (6%)
Carapils/Dextrin Malt 0.5 lbs. (6%)

Note the specialty malt weights have stayed at ½ pound, and to account for that the base grain weight is actually lower than the previous session IPA estimate when we just ratched down the OG in the software. We end up with a small increase in the percentage contribution of the specialty grains (and a corresponding reduction in the base grain percentage).

For our IIPA:

Fixed Imperial IPA (1.085)
U.S. Pale Malt 14.4 lbs. (94%)
Crystal 60 0.5 lbs. (3%)
Carapils/Dextrin Malt 0.5 lbs. (3%)

A similar result is seen to the fixed session beer. Note the more drastic percentage swing though. Keeping the specialty grains at ½ lb. each forces the base grain weight up quite a bit vs. the previous IIPA estimate. Don’t let the percentage number scare you because the flavor contribution from the critical specialty grains is going to be the same as the regular beer simply because the weight is the same.

How to adjust hop quantities

Adjusting hop quantities can be as equally problematic as grains. If you keep the same amount of hops in the session ale, it might come out too bitter and/or or just overpower the malt contribution. It’s the same thing with the IIPA; if you keep the hop schedule from 1.060 when you brew the 1.085 beer, that may not be enough hops and the malt may dominate the beer. This is even more complex when you factor in the large, late hop additions we’re becoming accustomed to for the massive aroma flavor they provide. As far as adjusting hops, let’s start by talking about bitterness and then we’ll talk about flavor & aroma separately, later.

Adjusting Hop Bitterness - This is the easy part. There is a sure fire tool that we can use to adjust our bitterness to maintain a similar balance between different strength beers. The tool, which I first found in Ray Daniel’s book, Designing Great Beer, is the BU:GU ratio (Bitterness Units to Gravity Units ratio). It’s a very simple relationship between IBUs and OG. Say you have a 1.050 beer with 50 IBUs. The Bitterness Units (BU) equals your IBUs; BU=50. The Gravity Units is the numbers right of the decimal as a whole number (GU=50). So the BU:GU ration of the beer is 50 ÷ 50 = 1. A not so hoppy beer might have a BU:GU in the 0.4 to 0.6 range. A very hoppy beer will be >1.5. You get the idea. So, like how we maintained the weight of the specialty grains, for hops we want to maintain the BU:GU ratio to maintain the same balance of bitterness to malt. Here’s how that relates in an example:

Regular Beer: OG 1.060, IBU 50, BU:GU = (50 ÷ 60) = 0.83
Session Beer: OG 1.045, BU:GU 0.83, therefore IBUs must be (45 x 0.83) = 37
Imperial Beer: OG 1.085, BU:GU 0.83, IBU = (85 x 0.83) = 71

Adjusting Flavor & Aroma Hop Additions – This is difficult to quantify because it comes down to your own tastes and the specific beer, but what I generally do is simply cut, for session beers, or increase, for imperial beers, my dosage rate of late hops and dry hops proportional to the OG. For an IPA, I typically dose hopstand hops at 21 grams/gallon. For a session version I’d cut that to 16 grams per gallon (based on ratio of the gravity units from the OGs = 1.045 & 1.060 = 45 ÷ 60 = 75%). Similarly for IIPA, I’d increase the dosage ratio proportionally to 30 grams/gallon (85 ÷ 60 = 142%). You may prefer to do more or less, based on the individual beer and what you want out of it, and after having tried it.


Further Tweaks – Other Grains and Adjuncts

So, let’s say you sessionized that favorite IPA and it’s lacking. Maybe it tastes ok but it’s seems thin or watery? Or that IIPA version is still just too malty?

To enhance session beers, here’s some quick thoughts:
  • Consider adding modest flavor body builders like dextrin malts (<2L), Carafoam, torrified wheat, flaked wheat, flaked barley, flaked outs. Start around 3% (taking that 3% away from your base grain percentage, not the specialty grains). I sue a lot of flaked barley and Carafoam.
  • Similarly, try using a richer but similar malt for all or a portion of the base grain bill. If you're using 80% pale malt, maybe try 50% pale and 30% pale ale.
  • Mash slightly higher to enhance unfermentables.
  • Add Calcium Chloride to enhance the malts.
  • Try a less attenuative yeast.

For imperial beers:
  • Consider using flaked rice and/or sugar at 3% (up to 10%, each, for extremely big beers).
  • Mash lower, even in the mid 140s.
  • Use highly attenuative yeasts.

And to wrap up, these are techniques that work for me. If nothing else, I hope these ideas make you think about your recipe formulation. I do think formulating recipes in terms of percentages instead of weight is wise, because it&#8217;s easy to get in a rut of thinking in terms of ½ lb of this and 1 lb of that, when your beer might really shine if you go from 5% to 4% or 3% of that one malt. Similarly, I feel planning hops in terms of grams per gallon is a nice, generic approach.

Cheers!
 
Good article, and it follows along the lines of some of the better advice I've seen in accomplishing these goals. Keep BU/GU and specialty malts the same. I do like seeing it all in one place with good organization.

You should submit this for a featured article; it's certainly good enough.

I've been thinking of downsizing (the alcohol) of one of my IPA's, and I was of adding a little (1/2 lb) of maltodextrin to the mix to keep the body up, because I look a little body with my bitterness ;) . That said, I like your suggestions of a little flaked wheat, because then I wouldn't get the sweetness with it.
 
Thanks for this - it makes a lot of sense, and I've been considering session-izing an IPA I've been making for the past couple years. I'll have to give your approach a try!
 
The final point about increasing the percent of specialty or cutting an Imperial should be baked into the original discussion of adjusting the base malt up or down, but instead are hugely important points tacked on as an afterthought. At the most basic level, simply adjusting the base malt would mean that your color would change from the original brew, but there are other flavor and mouthfeel things that happen too. One recommendation would be to direct readers to pay attention to FG and SRM. You can make a 9% DIPA taste "light" and a 4% session taste "heavy" just through manipulation of those factors - so if the goal is to preserve the feel of a "regular" recipe, simply adjusting the base malt might not be enough.
 
Color should change only slightly, unless your base malt is something with a bit of color (like munich) or you are making a gigantic gravity change, like 10% all the way to 4.5%.

Your point on FG is good, and the OP touched on considering a less attenuative (is that a word?) for session beers, but that really should come after other factors have been addressed.
 
Great post/article (front page a calling) @Austin @TxBrew (sorry if I'm out of line)

Really tremendous stuff here. This is useful even if trying to adjust a recipe for efficiency issues I would suggest. Perhaps I am wrong. I know there have been threads debating the merits of adjusting base grains only or adjusting everything in the recipe for efficiency issues.

Perhaps for efficiency, the latter is true, going off the percentages but this may introduce changes in how the hops' AA acids are isomerized and color aspects of the recipe.

I am still figuring this aspect of things out in Beersmith regarding scaling a recipe for efficiency and matching IBU's and color.

For sessionizing a beer or imperializing one these issues are taken to the extreme I suppose.

Sorry for my meandering post. Just wanted to post, really in order to thank you for putting this together. Great job.
 
Color should change only slightly, unless your base malt is something with a bit of color (like munich) or you are making a gigantic gravity change, like 10% all the way to 4.5%.

Your point on FG is good, and the OP touched on with considering a less attenuative (is that a word?) for session beers, but really should come after the factors have been addressed.

Yeah, I guess it's mostly a personal thing about color. My normal IPA has 12lbs of MO, so adjusting up or down roughly 4lbs for a session or imperial adjusts the color roughly 1.5 SRM and messes with the FG. I can adjust those with the amount of Crystal present, but will then slightly affect flavor. I don't know that there are any perfect solutions, but simple sugars and dextrine malts appear to work very well for me, so seeing them at the end instead of in the main points was kinda "wait, those things matter a lot too!"
 
Yeah, I guess it's mostly a personal thing about color. My normal IPA has 12lbs of MO, so adjusting up or down roughly 4lbs for a session or imperial adjusts the color roughly 1.5 SRM and messes with the FG. I can adjust those with the amount of Crystal present, but will then slightly affect flavor. I don't know that there are any perfect solutions, but simple sugars and dextrine malts appear to work very well for me, so seeing them at the end instead of in the main points was kinda "wait, those things matter a lot too!"

I wasn't even considering MO when I wrote the first part, and that base grain certain DOES add color, especially for a 4 pound change like you mention. So for that I apologize.
 
Thanks all for the feedback. This is stuff that I've been going by for a long time. It just hit me yesterday to take 30 min and write it down.

@AK7007 you bring up a good point and your right...BUT....try to think of what you're saying more broadly. It really comes down to what you want in the end beer. If i was going to go from IPA to IIPA, I'd go with sugar right off the bat. BUT if I was going for an imperial cream ale or imperial Vienna lager, I'd stick to the core rules and just adjust the base malt. also, say you're only going from 1.060 to 1.070? Id probably just add more base grain there. this is why I separated the concepts out (that and it keeps the ideas simple and usable)

And, if color is that important to anyone, other adjustments will have to be made. Its never been that critical to me. I always target a flavor profile that gets me into or very near the target color range for a given style. Ad a pinch midnight wheat to darken or used some flaked stuff to lighten.
 
Nice write up, I was surprised the first time I scaled up a recipe that it wasn't as linear as I thought it would be.
 
Timely post. I just asked about this yesterday. But mine is a porter. I've already bought my grains and am brewing tomorrow, so the ship has sailed, but I sort of took a hybrid approach. And I only wanted to increase 1-1.5% ABV. So really not a big difference. What I did was increase the base malt to match my target gravity. I then increased the wheat malt and C80 a little because I figured a higher gravity beer would need the higher body and sweetness they would bring. But I only increased the dark malts a smidge. I figured I didn't want it to get too roasty or too dark. I didn't increase the hops because there was only a 4 IBU change and this is a porter so that won't be noticeable. Let me know what you think.
 
if I was going for an imperial cream ale or imperial Vienna lager, I'd stick to the core rules and just adjust the base malt. also, say you're only going from 1.060 to 1.070? Id probably just add more base grain there. this is why I separated the concepts out (that and it keeps the ideas simple and usable)

I've never had or made an imperial cream ale. Must try...

I now need to experiment to find out if adjunct/dextrine rules that apply to IPAs could work for other things or the base adjustment is correct, since I've never done it myself.
 
Imperial cream ale on oak cubes soaked in buckwheat moonshine...yum. &#55357;&#56838; Have fun!
 
Great article. I used to adjust the whole recipe up or down but lately have been experimenting with exactly the process you describe from a malt perspective. I've always kept the bittering ratio in check.

One thing that has troubled me when using other people recipes is the following. My HERMS system is extremely efficient. I regularly see 90%+. What I've been doing in the past to convert recipes is to move the whole malt bill down to adjust for the correct %.

I'm now wondering if I should keep the specialty malts locked and move the base down.

Anyone have any experience with this?
 
Great post! I've been brewing for years, but a few months ago I realized I had been scaling recipes wrong! This is a really helpful thread for new brewers (or ones who have been doing it awhile, but have been doing it wrong!).

I nominate this for a sticky.

@Austin @TxBrew
 
I third the sticky recommendation. I bookmarked it too for future reference.


This also needs to be on the front page. It's more than worthy and these are the types of articles I love to see on the front. Thanks Weezy!
 
There is a wonderful beer balance chart available that relates OG and IBUs to determine of a beer will be malty, hoppy, etc........ A glance at the chart tells you where your beer will be with good accuracy. This chart can be found by Googling if you don't have a copy.

I've made "imperial" beers in two ways. One was to increase the grain bill or add DME, and the other was to add invert sugar or corn sugar.

Using invert or corn sugar throws the balance chart off by exactly the gravity points the sugar adds. Thus if you take a brew and "imperialize" it, your hop bill will stay the same, and you will have a beer very similar to the parent.

Assuming that the term "sessionize" means simply reducing ABV and nothing else, I really don't think it's realistic to expect to be able to adjust base malt and expect a low alcohol clone. I've brewed beers where I mashed very high, and the result has been more body.... by "mash high", I mean around 160. ABV goes down a bit, and body goes up. My approach to making a reduced alcohol brew that has the body of a higher gravity brew is to reduce base malt... and mash high. Sessionizing a brew is a far more problematic objective than imperializing it. How much base malt do you eliminate, and how high do you mash.

But is a full body low alcohol brew really a "session beer"..... It will be as filling as the regular brew, just not as intoxicating. And then there is the issue of alcohol as a flavor element.........

One of my next brews....... once I finish my "wedding brew series" will be a Mosaic Rye Wit which originally was about 2.5 % abv, and will be bumped up to about 6% using invert sugar. The original grain bill for 2.5 gallons was 2 pounds. I'm afraid that the additional alcohol will materially effect the perceived taste, and I'm not sure what to do to mask that effect........ any ideas? Imagine taking Bud Light and adding everclear to it, doubling the ABV.

H.W.
 
......Imagine taking Bud Light and adding everclear to it, doubling the ABV.

H.W.



That's funny you say that. I remember having a conversation with one of my coworkers who didn't understand the hype of Bud Light Platinum with some of our other coworkers. He likes the higher gravity beers, but hates BLP because it tastes like regular Bud Light with a hot alcohol bite to it. On the underhand, he semi likes Bud Light every now and then.

This doesn't mean I think less of the article, but tells me there's probably just more to it than simply change a grain here or a hop amount there. However, this method has worked for the OP, so IMO it's worth experimenting for myself.


EDIT: This is turning out to be a great discussion!
 
That's funny you say that. I remember having a conversation with one of my coworkers who didn't understand the hype of Bud Light Platinum with some of our other coworkers. He likes the higher gravity beers, but hates BLP because it tastes like regular Bud Light with a hot alcohol bite to it. On the underhand, he semi likes Bud Light every now and then.

This doesn't mean I think less of the article, but tells me there's probably just more to it than simply change a grain here or a hop amount there. However, this method has worked for the OP, so IMO it's worth experimenting for myself.


EDIT: This is turning out to be a great discussion!

I agree that this is a great discussion.......... I'm glad the OP brought up the subject.... it opens up a dialog, and creates a forum where we can share our ideas and experiences.

H.W.
 
I tried a "session" IPA a couple of months ago with this grainbill mashed at 154.

5.5 lb 2-Row (US)
1.0 lb Munich - Light 10L
1.0 lb Flaked Oats
0.5 lb Flaked Wheat
0.25 lb Caramel/Crystal 10L (US)
0.25 lb Caramel/Crystal 40L (US)


All cascade with FWH, no bittering and the remaining additions under 10 mins. US05 for yeast.

The results were different. Gravity dropped all the way down to 1.004. It was still thinnish but very drinkable. It was good, but you could tell something was a little off. My thoughts were to up the mash temps to 156 next time and use wlp 051 or wlp 041 next time.

I like the malto suggestion. I've avoided it to date, but might give it a try next round.
 
I tried a "session" IPA a couple of months ago with this grainbill mashed at 154.

5.5 lb 2-Row (US)
1.0 lb Munich - Light 10L
1.0 lb Flaked Oats
0.5 lb Flaked Wheat
0.25 lb Caramel/Crystal 10L (US)
0.25 lb Caramel/Crystal 40L (US)


All cascade with FWH, no bittering and the remaining additions under 10 mins. US05 for yeast.

The results were different. Gravity dropped all the way down to 1.004. It was still thinnish but very drinkable. It was good, but you could tell something was a little off. My thoughts were to up the mash temps to 156 next time and use wlp 051 or wlp 041 next time.

I like the malto suggestion. I've avoided it to date, but might give it a try next round.

Again, that "something was a little off" is probably partly low alcohol.........

My thought is that the term "session beer" does not mean just low alcohol..... it also means light body, or "not filling".... People who drink "lite beer" are probably more concerned about body and calories than alcohol. A session beer should be an "easy drinker" that doesn't fill you up......... or knock you on your ass.


H.W.
 
I tried a "session" IPA a couple of months ago with this grainbill mashed at 154.

5.5 lb 2-Row (US)
1.0 lb Munich - Light 10L
1.0 lb Flaked Oats
0.5 lb Flaked Wheat
0.25 lb Caramel/Crystal 10L (US)
0.25 lb Caramel/Crystal 40L (US)


All cascade with FWH, no bittering and the remaining additions under 10 mins. US05 for yeast.

The results were different. Gravity dropped all the way down to 1.004. It was still thinnish but very drinkable. It was good, but you could tell something was a little off. My thoughts were to up the mash temps to 156 next time and use wlp 051 or wlp 041 next time.

I like the malto suggestion. I've avoided it to date, but might give it a try next round.

About 1.045 OG? About 90% attenuation? It looks ok to me. I'd be glad to gov you my thoughts but I'll need to know a little more about what was "interesting" about it and how it was different than what you were hoping for.
 
Nothing specific Weezy, just subtly not an IPA. Probably something to do with what Owly said & with my attentuation higher than I hoped. Bitterness was OK, hop flavor was good

Im going to make another batch in a couple of weeks with the changes referenced above. I think the US05 was my real mistake.
 
Back
Top