Non-farmy Brett?

[teucer]

The latest Zymurgy is here, and it has an article about Brett in it. It mentions that it's possible to do non-soured clean fermentations using 100% Brett, but it doesn't say much about technique.

In particular it says the following that has me very intrigued:

The clean, 100 percent Brett fermentation is one in which no souring organisms or souring method is used. The term "clean fermentation" refers to the character of the finished beer, which lacks the classic barnyard aromas usually associated with Brettanomyces, but displays pronounced fruity ester aromas with little phenolic character.

Anyone know much about the technique here? Is this really as simple as just pitching pure Brett with no souring bacteria? I have a dislike for the horse-blanket aroma I've gotten from unintentional Brett contamination once and taste in many lambics, but I've enjoyed some traditional Belgian beers with Brett in them that did not exhibit that character.

If I wanted to experiment with this, what steps should I take to ensure the horse-blanket taste stays away?

The article also notes that 100% Brett beers "pose less of a threat to equipment than the bacteria involved in sour brewing," which is good to hear - I've lost a fermenter to those after using it for a sour mash and then being unable to get the lacto dead enough to reuse the thing.

 

[Thundercougarfalconbird]

I did a 100% brett C pale ale that came out clean, it had some great fruity esters, but no barnyard (I need to go back and try a bottle again, its been a few months). I fermented at 80f and didn't oxygenate.

 

[moti_mo]

I did about the same type of brew as Thunder, a 100% Brett C saison/pale. I can't remember if I oxygenated, I'll have to look back in my notes. But I fermented lower, ~68 F. Tastes really hoppy and fruity, with minimal barnyard.

 

[ryane]

Different brett strains will react differently, In general though anything from WL is pretty horsey, with the one exception of their brett C. The WY stuff it mostly fruity (especially L) when used as a primary fermenter.

With time though Ive found that even 100% brett beers will get funky. Some bottles I have of a brett L beer and a brett B beer from ~2-3yrs ago have quite a bit of funk in them now. They taste almost like a rotting banana nut muffin....mmmmmm yummy

There really isnt too much of a technique to all brett beers, but I did put in my 2¢ in a blog post here if youre interested.

In general though a huge pitch of yeast (lager rates) will give you a "cleaner ferment" that ends up more fruity, lower pitch rates take much longer to ferment out and result in a lot more funky flavors (many of which arent very tasty depending on how much you pitch) if you just add a smack pack/tube your massively underpitching, especially in the case of the WL tubes, as the WY packs have a lot more yeast in them.

I would also say that the threat of contamination from any type of sour/funky beer is next to nil for homebrewers. I regularly use the same racking cane/tubing and bottling bucket for "clean" and sour beers. Ive yet to have a contamination issue. I think as long as youre not a pig with your equipment (hardened on crud and chunks) you dont really have to worry about it, you just need to use a good sanitizer (Caustic, followed by acid or just iodophor are my favorites)

 

[Calder]

Make a big starter and aerate well (I do it twice, once at the start, and then again, somewhere between 6 and 12 hours).

I've only fermented in the mid 60s and have had good results. My next one (in a few weeks), I'm going to see what fermenting at 75-80 will do.

I also use about half a pound of Acid Malt as it seems to like acidic wort.

 

[teucer]

So, to sum up:

- pitch lots of Brett cells
- any of the three species will work
- temperature doesn't seem to be a huge deal but not cold
- keep the oxygen out
- pitch into a somewhat acidic wort
- bulk age for a while before bottling

That sound about right to everyone?

 

[Homercidal]

There are a few different Brett strains. Some are more horsey than others and method has a lot to do with it too.

 

[Soma]

I have a 100% Brett B aging in a carboy that displays a profound barnyard/dank basement vibe. OG 1.048, lots of oxygen, pitched straight from the wyeast smack pack. Perhaps avoid this strain if you are looking for a cleaner/fruitier character.

 

[ryane]

I have a 100% Brett B aging in a carboy that displays a profound barnyard/dank basement vibe. OG 1.048, lots of oxygen, pitched straight from the wyeast smack pack. Perhaps avoid this strain if you are looking for a cleaner/fruitier character.

with larger pitch rate than the smack pack you wont get as many funky flavors

 

[ryane]

So, to sum up:

- any of the three species will work

Yes but with caveats,

in order of funkiness for White labs

C < B < L

For wyeast

L < B

and wyeast in general is far less funky than white labs versions as a whole, there are ways to use the yeast that this order wont make sense (ie low pitch rates, etc) so this is for high pitch rates and as the sole yeast

 

[Calder]

So, to sum up:

- pitch lots of Brett cells
- any of the three species will work
- temperature doesn't seem to be a huge deal but not cold
- keep the oxygen out
- pitch into a somewhat acidic wort
- bulk age for a while before bottling

That sound about right to everyone?

I disagree. I think you need lots of oxygen. More so than with a regular beer.

I have a 100% Brett B aging in a carboy that displays a profound barnyard/dank basement vibe. OG 1.048, lots of oxygen, pitched straight from the wyeast smack pack. Perhaps avoid this strain if you are looking for a cleaner/fruitier character.

The yeast cells in a smack are far less than with standard yeast. It is only a pitchable amount if you use it for secondary and want the rustic Brett flavors. Brett as a primary yeast needs a much higher pitch rate than standard yeast.

I have used Brett-B a lot (WLP650) with great success.

 

[ryane]

Brett as a primary yeast needs a much higher pitch rate than standard yeast.

I think your headed in the right direction with this, but its not necessarily MORE cells than sacch. Because the packs have much lower cell counts than the sach packs we need to do larger starters to get into the same range of cell counts

I think chad yakobson did a bit with cells/mL pitch rates, but I dunno what the conclusion was off the top of my head