Place to record inaccuracies in software?

[SavaShip]

I have noted many inaccuracies in BeerSmith2... I was wondering if we had a place where everyone recorded their experience?

For example:

Beersmith 2 claims Danstar's Nottingham yeast has 72-75% attenuation. My real life experience with Nottingham yeast, and I've never gotten less than 82%, and have at one point gotten as high as 90%! This will really affect the flavor of the intended beer.

So, is there a place, or should there be a sticky somewhere to post our recommendations for adjustments?

 

[GeneticBrew]

Yeast manufacturers usually give conservative general attenuation ranges and characteristics.

How much the yeast actually attenuates is a product of your process.

There is no precise formula or method of predicting attenuation, therefore all beer recipe software simply uses the average attenuation characteristics of the yeast.

It is up to you to know the yeast characteristics and to control the mash and fermentation processes to give the desired attenuation.

If you know that you want (and can get) 90% attenuation out of the yeast because of your process, then you would need to enter that into the custom attenuation field.

To classify software as "inaccurate" because of this would simply be a false statement akin to saying that the software doesn't have the right PPG value for certain grains (as the grain analysis changes from year to year). You need to enter the appropriate PPG from the analysis sheets for the grains you're using just as you need to enter the expected attenuation from your yeast.

 

[SavaShip]

This is an inaccuracy, plain and simple. Don't jump in to defend the Software when you obviously never looked at the numbers. Danstar classifies Nottingham yeast as a "high attenuation" yeast, but Beersmith defaults it to 72-75%. Beersmith classifies it lower than fermentis' S-04 which is "medium attenuation" at 75%. It seems to be more of an error, and less of "the process". I have mashed at 156F to attempt to reduce the fermentable sugars and increase body, and still wound up over 80% attenuation with Nottingham.


Programmers don't know everything, so I thought it would be nice if we had a place to share our corrections, but if you think you can turn a high attenuation yeast into a medium attenuation yeast through a process other than filtering it out when you hit your desired gravity, let us know of this wizardry!

 

[broadbill]

This is an inaccuracy, plain and simple. Don't jump in to defend the Software when you obviously never looked at the numbers. Danstar classifies Nottingham yeast as a "high attenuation" yeast, but Beersmith defaults it to 72-75%. Beersmith classifies it lower than fermentis' S-04 which is "medium attenuation" at 75%. It seems to be more of an error, and less of "the process". I have mashed at 156F to attempt to reduce the fermentable sugars and increase body, and still wound up over 80% attenuation with Nottingham.


Programmers don't know everything, so I thought it would be nice if we had a place to share our corrections, but if you think you can turn a high attenuation yeast into a medium attenuation yeast through a process other than filtering it out when you hit your desired gravity, let us know of this wizardry!

Lemme get this straight....

Danstar provides a % attenuation range for the product they make.

Developers at BeerSmith looks up this %attenuation on the Danstar website and adds it to their database.

Brewer (lets call him SavaShip) makes a beer, and decides that the % attenuation that DANSTAR provides is in error. (Never mind this is from ONE brewer brewing ONE beer and getting a SINGLE attenuation value...but that is a discussion for another time...)

But somehow this is on Beersmith to correct?????? You are correct that programmers don't know anything, so why do you think they are responsible for providing the correct number, if Danstar hasn't done it? Are you proposing that Beersmith independently test each ingredient in their database to confirm the numbers in their database are accurate?

I'm not following your logic at all.

 

[SavaShip]

Lemme get this straight....

Danstar provides a % attenuation range for the product they make.

Developers at BeerSmith looks up this %attenuation on the Danstar website and adds it to their database.

Danstar doesn't give a Percentage... Danstar uses terms like "low", "medium" and "high" and Final Gravity expectations. Which is why I thought listing your real life attenuation percentages would have been a good idea since BeerSmith's are obviously just made up, I am surprised at the amount of resistance to this idea, and the amount of assumption the attenuation percentages in BeerSmith are based on some sort of document that doesn't exist.

Here, I did a search and found some other people from this forum who experience the same things as me. https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f12/nottingham-attenuation-100054/

 

[IslandLizard]

In software like that you're bound to find many inconsistencies with your personal experiences and systems. Just change the values to reflect your personal ones and live on.

Even if some embedded values are a bit conservative, or outdated, how would one implement updates? While some would embrace them, others wouldn't want their carefully tweaked values overwritten, and definitely not by accident.

I use Beersmith, and find the user interface mindboggling. But I realize that all but a few users would be savvy enough to edit tables directly, do dynamic look-ups, or run external programs on them. So I use the software for what it is and what it can do, but would love to see an expert mode featuring customization and way less buttons to click. I hate ever changing "ribbons" and "clutter bars." I'm menu driven, which perhaps shows my age.

Beersmith has its own website with technical forums, feedback areas and bug reports. Perhaps you can offer suggestions there?

Brew software wise, there's not much alternative out there.

 

[broadbill]

Brew software wise, there's not much alternative out there.

I use beer tools pro...I like the UI much better than Beersmith. Cross-platform too.

 

[BreezyBrew]

In software like that you're bound to find many inconsistencies with your personal experiences and systems. Just change the values to reflect your personal ones and live on.

Agree with this. As long as the system is designed to be flexible enough for you to enter your own values then there's not much else the program author can do.

I'm glad Beersmith provides enough locations to enter my own values. Could they do a better job of theoretical values vs measured? Sure. I would love love to see a version that had enough analytics to predict values from previous brews. But that's a topic for another forum.

 

[SavaShip]

Even if some embedded values are a bit conservative, or outdated, how would one implement updates? While some would embrace them, others wouldn't want their carefully tweaked values overwritten, and definitely not by accident.

BeerSmith is fantastic software, and I'm hoping nobody thinks that I'm being too hard on it, there are small things, easy to tweak things that I think could be more accurate. Danstar yeasts are hard to find the attenuation percentages for because they are not listed in Danstar's documentation. If you are inclined to edit your yeast attenuations, you go to the "ingredients" tab at the top, and select your yeast, scroll to Danstar's nottingham and open it up. It will have a minimum attenuation, and a maximum attenuation reflected in a percentage. I would recommend making the minimum 80%, and maximum 86% for Danstar's Nottingham Ale yeast. While I have gotten 90% out of it, that is not the norm. Of the previous 15 batches I have done with Danstar's Nottingham, my lowest attenuation was 81%, at a 156F mash. While it's possible that as others have implied, I'm just incompetent, there are enough previous postings about that yeast on this very forum to justify adjusting the attenuations.

 

[SavaShip]

Agree with this. As long as the system is designed to be flexible enough for you to enter your own values then there's not much else the program author can do.

I'm glad Beersmith provides enough locations to enter my own values. Could they do a better job of theoretical values vs measured? Sure. I would love love to see a version that had enough analytics to predict values from previous brews. But that's a topic for another forum.

Have you experienced the problem with beers above 30 SRM not calculating the color correctly? I have that problem specifically with a malt called "Blackprinz" which according to the datasheet is a 500SRM malt, but it seems to end up twice as dark as calculated.

 

[BierMuncher]

The yeast strain used is only one part of the attentuation formula. Take a highly attenuating yeast like Notty, then do a 160 degree mash rest at 40 minutes, and that high temp/short rest will override Notty's abitlity to attenuate to a very low FG.

Nothing replaces experience and careful note taking. The parameters provided by Beersmith are just that. I tend to be more focused on other outputs from Beersmith like OG, SRM and IBU. Because yeast attenuation is such a fickle monster, I rely on personal experience from one batch to the next.

 

[IslandLizard]

I use beer tools pro...I like the UI much better than Beersmith. Cross-platform too.

I'll check it out. Thanks!

I realize there are other brew programs out there, all but a few are cloud based. When I said there aren't many alternatives, I meant I have not come across another program that's as feature rich as or can do what Beersmith does. It's the UI that's totally whacked. And there are some errors too, (e.g., listing brew steps in incorrect order) and areas that simply cannot be made useful. Like the mash tab <ugh!>.

 

[geoffm33]

I use beer tools pro...I like the UI much better than Beersmith. Cross-platform too.

As an FYI - Beersmith (download page) is cross platform as well.

 

[BreezyBrew]

I tend to be more focused on other outputs from Beersmith like OG, SRM and IBU.

Totally agree on OG (Many of my brews hit this spot on) and IBU. As far as the rendering of the picture, it always seems to be a bit off for me. I believe you were speaking of the actual SRM number though. I haven't done too much research on this since I don't do competitions and it's of less importance to me.

 

[GeneticBrew]

This is an inaccuracy, plain and simple. Don't jump in to defend the Software when you obviously never looked at the numbers. Danstar classifies Nottingham yeast as a "high attenuation" yeast, but Beersmith defaults it to 72-75%. Beersmith classifies it lower than fermentis' S-04 which is "medium attenuation" at 75%. It seems to be more of an error, and less of "the process". I have mashed at 156F to attempt to reduce the fermentable sugars and increase body, and still wound up over 80% attenuation with Nottingham.


Programmers don't know everything, so I thought it would be nice if we had a place to share our corrections, but if you think you can turn a high attenuation yeast into a medium attenuation yeast through a process other than filtering it out when you hit your desired gravity, let us know of this wizardry!

As previously stated, you'll need to update the default attenuation with what you actually get.

Looking at different brewing software you'll see various default values for that yeast (and many other yeast).

If you'd like to know the experience other brewers have had with that yeast, you might have luck starting a thread in the Fermentation/Yeast forum. Searching for Nottingham attenuation reveals much information about the properties of that yeast.

If you'd like to find the reason why those percentages were entered as defaults or if they can be changed you could simply email Brad Smith himself. He will most certainly answer your question.

 

[SavaShip]

The yeast strain used is only one part of the attentuation formula. Take a highly attenuating yeast like Notty, then do a 160 degree mash rest at 40 minutes, and that high temp/short rest will override Notty's abitlity to attenuate to a very low FG.

Nothing replaces experience and careful note taking. The parameters provided by Beersmith are just that. I tend to be more focused on other outputs from Beersmith like OG, SRM and IBU. Because yeast attenuation is such a fickle monster, I rely on personal experience from one batch to the next.

I had 2 batches where I did a mash rest. First 152F-158F, second 155F-160F. My notebook is really starting to look like something awesome though! The Nottingham yeast still attenuated at 81% or higher. I just don't think the software reported the "high attenuation" of Notty properly, as I stated before the attenuation rates in BeerSmith for Notty "High attenuation" are lower numbers than they listed for S-04 "Medium Attenuation". BeerSmith is still better than working this crap out by hand though!

That said, I love many things about Nottingham, it seems to finish in about 4 days pretty consistently. It rarely has unwanted fruit ester smells or tastes. Just some of my final ABV % knocked my boots off!

I am brewing again this evening, with my adjusted Notty Attenuation and a new recipe that reflects it. I will let you know if my results are as expected. I am aiming to have a final gravity of about 1.012-1.014... any advice you have is greatly appreciated!

 

[Homercidal]

My experience with Notty is different. I've used it many times and always found something not quite right. Eventually I found that even at a "low" 70 degrees fermentation I was getting a LOT of esters. I've had much better success using it in the low 60s. I do like the hard, compact yeast cake it leaves.

I've learned that I needed to adjust my process and/or my expectations to meet the yeast.

I highly recommend you contact Brad Smith at Beersmith and let him know of your experience. It's certainly possible that the attenuation given in the software is incorrect. If so, I'm sure he would be happy to make it more accurate by default.

In the meantime, there is nothing stopping you from adjusting it's profile in the software yourself. Most everything in BS can be edited to suit your process.

 

[Pappers_]

This is an inaccuracy, plain and simple. Don't jump in to defend the Software when you obviously never looked at the numbers. Danstar classifies Nottingham yeast as a "high attenuation" yeast, but Beersmith defaults it to 72-75%. Beersmith classifies it lower than fermentis' S-04 which is "medium attenuation" at 75%. It seems to be more of an error, and less of "the process". I have mashed at 156F to attempt to reduce the fermentable sugars and increase body, and still wound up over 80% attenuation with Nottingham.

I disagree. Process has a large impact on the actual attenuation a brewer will experience, even using the same yeast. I've used Nottingham and experienced 70%ish attenuation.

 

[SavaShip]

I disagree. Process has a large impact on the actual attenuation a brewer will experience, even using the same yeast. I've used Nottingham and experienced 70%ish attenuation.

That being said, it would still be odd for S-04, a "Medium Attenuation" yeast to be 75%, and Nottingham yeast a "High Attenuation" yeast to be 72%. I feel for that reason alone it's inaccurate. The only way I've found to decrease the attenuation is to reduce the amount of sugar you feed the buggers... they seem to eat it all until you hit 1.008-1.010 FG.

 

[broadbill]

That being said, it would still be odd for S-04, a "Medium Attenuation" yeast to be 75%, and Nottingham yeast a "High Attenuation" yeast to be 72%. I feel for that reason alone it's inaccurate. The only way I've found to decrease the attenuation is to reduce the amount of sugar you feed the buggers... they seem to eat it all until you hit 1.008-1.010 FG.

I'd also be looking at your process rather than the yeast if you are experiencing overattenuation issues.

 

[pablosbrewing]

That being said, it would still be odd for S-04, a "Medium Attenuation" yeast to be 75%, and Nottingham yeast a "High Attenuation" yeast to be 72%. I feel for that reason alone it's inaccurate. The only way I've found to decrease the attenuation is to reduce the amount of sugar you feed the buggers... they seem to eat it all until you hit 1.008-1.010 FG.

Be sure you are looking at Real Attenuation, not Appparent Attenuation. I have a 6.5% beer and 8.9% beer - both @ 1.010 - and both have almost identical real attenuations from the same yeast.

 

[pablosbrewing]

That being said, it would still be odd for S-04, a "Medium Attenuation" yeast to be 75%, and Nottingham yeast a "High Attenuation" yeast to be 72%. I feel for that reason alone it's inaccurate. The only way I've found to decrease the attenuation is to reduce the amount of sugar you feed the buggers... they seem to eat it all until you hit 1.008-1.010 FG.

And -

Where are you seeing "Medium Attenuation" and "High Attenuation" in Beersmith.

Notty is 75% and S-04 is 73%, in my version which is up to date version 2.2.12

Edit: are you looking at Flocculation?