stickyfinger
Well-Known Member
wlp095 will produce a hazy beer. the hops are more important than yeast anyway
wlp095 will produce a hazy beer. the hops are more important than yeast anyway
and yeast is more important than chloride/sulfate ratios
Don't underestimate yeast choice though. This style didn't fully click for me until I switched from 1217 to 1318, but that's just my preference as I try to emulate TH's IPAs.
I'm by no means an expert on yeast choice in this style. A few things I know: WLP095 will produce an excellent, round flavor in this style with plenty of haze. It slowly drops clear, but the enormous hopping makes the beer very hazy for at least 6 weeks. US-05 produces too dry, crisp and punchy of a flavor in this style for my taste. I've also had problems with it producing diacetyl after dry hopping and kegging and will not use it again.
I have my first double batch going with Giga Yeast Vermont IPA. If I don't prefer it to the WLP095, I'll just stick with that, as it is easier to get and is at likely better in quality (or at least as good) since it comes from White Labs. Not getting much fruitiness so far from the GY in the fermentation space aromas.
Conan gets more fruity each generation. I liked generation 2-4 the best. If you want fruity, then make sure to harvest it. better attenuation too.
Personally, I think yeast has very little to do with "haze"..... I have been using 1056 lately and it is just as hazy as conan.... and 1272, and 007, and every other yeast I have used to be honest. Still waiting to try a yeast in these beers that does not leave it hazy.
In my opinion, if yeast is making your beer "hazy" it isn't "hazy" - it is murky.
That said, I have not used 095 - so can't comment on that specifically. I think that low pH is the more likely explanation of your beer being clearer. I think there is something to the low pH and clear beer.
Likewise - it is not Sulfate:Chloride ratio either. The picture I put up a few posts ago is a beer with 140 sulfate: 70 Chloride and it was brewed with 1056 yeast.
Hazy comes predominately from interaction of lots of hops late/post boil/low temp hopping plus hopping in primary. I just have seen no evidence that it really has anything specifically to do with yeast, sulfate/chloride or (with Brulosophy's latest experiment) flaked grains.
There are really only 2 potential contributors left in my opinion:
* The late/dry hopping interactions
* Slightly higher than normal pH (5.4 ish boil, 4.5-4.6 post fermentation)
This makes a lot of sense to me. When I first keg, the beers are somewhat murky due to the yeast and somehop particles even. Over time, you can see the beers clearing ever so slightly so that you can maybe just see through the glass if you look carefully. That must be the yeast cloudiness slowly dissipating as it drops out and the remaining hop-induced-haze remaining.
I hadn't looked at pH too much. Have you compared higher and lower pHs in these beers, or did you just settle on a higher pH and make every beer that way?
I've made this recipe twice now and it has quickly become a favorite.
Question...I just scored some cheap hops. Azacca, Centennial, Summit and Cascade. Do you think any combination of these would work well as a hop substitute? I figured I love the base beer so much, might as well experiment with these bulk hops.
I'll keep re-using it. Does growing it up in a starter count as a generation though? I harvest yeast from my starters as opposed to the fermentor.
I would think it sorta counts, probably depends how large it is, the gravity and how stressed the yeast get. but im not a yeast expert. I think your way is the best option for always having healthy yeast on hand.
Its tough harvesting from this beer with all the hops and dry hops mixing in.
Brewing a session beer and harvesting it is a great idea too, i believe that is the advice from the OP.
I have been targeting 5.4 ish simply because that is a number I see recommended often from professional brewers in regard to hoppy beers. Also see information from beers from time to time as well about higher finishing pH's in these beers.
I've made this recipe twice now and it has quickly become a favorite.
Question...I just scored some cheap hops. Azacca, Centennial, Summit and Cascade. Do you think any combination of these would work well as a hop substitute? I figured I love the base beer so much, might as well experiment with these bulk hops.
I've been wondering the same thing. I make a double starter, pitch half and save the other half for the next starter. I view this as having an infinite amount of re-uses, since it's made into a new starter each time. I have no science behind that opinion, just seems different that pitching on yeast cake, yeast washing, etc. They have a re-use limit.
There are only three possible variables that are really at play at this point (before the beer ever even hits the fermenter):
1.) Flaked grains (which Brulosophy's recent experiment seems to discount)
2.) Lots of late hops at sub 170 temps
3.) Higher finishing pH
Keep in mind the Brulosophy experiment is one data point and only included flaked oats. Your own recipe calls for flaked barley and flaked wheat, which both may contribute different types or amounts of proteins which stay in suspension and contribute to haze
I don't agree that a 0.10 - 0.15 difference in mash pH is going to make that dramatic of a difference in beer clarity. It does not make much sense from a chemistry perspective - these complex acid/base and related protein precipitation equilibria are almost certainly not centered around that fine of a point.
Agree that the heavy late/dry hopping of high oil varieties is a big contributor - all those oils and terpenes of limited water solubility are not being boiled off and are left behind. Combine that with elevated protein levels (from flaked grains) and powdery yeast strains and you have yourself a hazy beer.
But most of all I agree that haze should be a by-product and not a goal of the style.
I have been targeting 5.4 ish simply because that is a number I see recommended often from professional brewers in regard to hoppy beers. Also see information from beers from time to time as well about higher finishing pH's in these beers.
One of the very first things I noticed when I started brewing NE IPA's and targeting 5.4 instead of 5.25-5.3 is that my kettle wort did not drop clear at the end of the boil. These beers are hazy at flame out for me. They are hazy after chilling, they are hazy in the hydrometer - that obviously has nothing to do with yeast or dry hopping. There are only three possible variables that are really at play at this point (before the beer ever even hits the fermenter):
1.) Flaked grains (which Brulosophy's recent experiment seems to discount)
2.) Lots of late hops at sub 170 temps
3.) Higher finishing pH
Other beers that I brew, even with similar grain bills, targeting 5.25-5.3 type pH..... The wort post boil, during chilling drops clear..... really clear. You can read a newspaper through the wort I put in the hydrometer in a "normal" beer. These beers do not do that - they stay very hazy in hydrometer and they do not drop clear - even if I let the sample sit there for a day or two. So, in my experience, it seems like something is already going on at this point in the process that is producing haziness as a byproduct of the process.
Right now, I have several experimental batches going. Maybe for my next batches I will brew two and acidify one to 5.2 and leave the other at my normal 5.4-5.45 range and see if that makes a difference.
I also wonder about the potential for different hops???? Do the hops we focus on (Citra, Simcoe, Columbus, Galaxy, Mosaic......) have oil compositions that play into the production of these polyphenols more than say your traditional IPA hops (Chinook, Cascade, Centennial, etc.)????
At the end of the day though, I think it is important to come back to the fact that the "goal" of these beers is NOT to make them hazy. The goal is that they taste great..... and, for whatever reason - it seems that haziness is an attribute that comes along with the flavors we are chasing. I am mainly just curious as to why that is exactly.
Holy haze, batman!
Ended at 1.009 and tastes like a tropical fruit smoothie!
Regarding the post-fermentation pH that Braufessor mentioned (4.5-4.6), does anyone know whether the beer being carbonated would affect the pH if I were to measure it now? I've never really had a reason to pay attention to post-fermentation pH before this, so I haven't tried measuring it before.
Also, for Braufessor or any others who may have measured - does a 5.4 mash pH imply a similar pre-boil pH in your setup? I've gone from batch sparging to BIAB for my last few batches (including this one), so the ph in my mash tun/brew kettle at the end of the mash is the same thing as my pre-boil pH. I'm just curious whether those here who sparge are maybe getting a slightly higher pre-boil pH than the 5.4 number from the mash.
Yes, CO2 makes a difference.... not a ton though I don't think. Maybe .1 or .2??? You can also let it sit/pour it back and forth to take the CO2 out of it and then take a reading.
Also, in general, your kettle pH will be higher than your mash pH unless you treat your sparge water to an excess to account for it. If I use 100% RO water and add the exact same minerals per gallon to both mash water and sparge water (with no acid additions) I find that my kettle pH goes up a bit. So, perhaps my mash pH is around 5.40 and my kettle pH ends up at 5.45 maybe.
That is interesting. Do you fly sparge? I adjust my HLT to 5.45-5.55 before heating it up, so I'd guess my preboil pH is around the same range on all beers. Should I be adjusting my preboil pH down all the way to 5.2 for other beers that I ant to be clear? I assumed darker beers should be 5.6ish and other beers should be 5.4-5.5 for best flavor
I have been targeting 5.4 ish simply because that is a number I see recommended often from professional brewers in regard to hoppy beers. Also see information from beers from time to time as well about higher finishing pH's in these beers.
I've noticed that a lot of the "classic" brewers use a lot of carapils and wheat malt in a lot beers. i think the wheat malt is maybe a red herring, but they were onto something with the carapils. the trick is to get the full mouthfeel without the caramely flavors (or too much) so i think the low lovibond caramel may be good. It may be possible to just add more and more carapils though too. lots of room for experimentation here. my beers always seem to taste so dry, so i'm not afraid to load in more crystal or carapils. a friend says i have coined a new beer, the DRY-PA. ha ha.
I've been addicted to these NE IPAs though since starting to brew them. I love them so much. It's mostly what I want to brew now, along with some rich dark beers and a few lagers!
And then brulosophy goes and casts doubt on carapils and body (at least Briess' - http://brulosophy.com/2016/11/28/de...ous-beer-characteristics-exbeeriment-results/). I use weyermann carafoam. I know there is a difference (http://thunderdogbrewery.com/2016/04/13/weyermann-carafoam-breiss-carapils/). Either way, the world as we know it, ever changing.
More importantly, I've found that the mash temp is by far the most critical aspect of head retention. I think i've stumbled upon the magic sequence of temperature steps to make beer with great head (3 for 3 now - different styles and lagers and ales).
Well don't keep us in suspense man..... what are the steps?
Enter your email address to join: