Stone's odd Pale Recipe?

[bigdaddybrew]

Stone Brewing has released their Pale ale recipe for homebrewers but something is off...

http://blog.stonebrewing.com/index.php/stone-pale-ale-recipe/

I entered it into Beersmith and got some weird results...

65% efficiency to hit 1.057? Maybe I should e-mail them some tips to boost their efficiency.

Stone says the Pale is 50 IBUs but Beersmith says 29 IBUs with this hop schedule.

Stone's website says Magnum and Ahtanum but the recipe uses Columbus and Ahtanum. With a 90 minute boil maybe it makes no difference?

WLP007 or WLP002? Not exactly interchangeable in my brew book with about 10% difference in attentuation.

Mash at 156f for 20 minutes? Who mashes for 20 minutes?

Mashing at 156F with more than a pound and a half of crystal malt? Good luck hitting a final gravity of 1.014 especially using WLP002.

Ferment at 72f? With the pressure in a giant commercial fermenter suppressing the esters it might be good but with 5 gallons I think it might be too fruity?

What is going on here? Any thoughts?

 

[mtnagel]

And what about skimming off the foam? I've never heard of that before. Yes, lots of head scratchers in there.

 

[madscientist451]

The Columbus hops I can get have 15% AA, so I put that in and added another .44 oz at 60 min and it came out to 52 IBUs. I'd probably use 1/2 oz at each Columbus hop addition.
I plan on making this beer, I need a pale ale in my rotation, and can't even get Stone beer here, so its on the schedule.
There's a few other odd things in the recipe (like the yeast, I'll use WL002) and the directions (mash time, put lid on kettle at flameout) but otherwise it looks pretty good. I've never used Antanum hops before, so this will be a good time to try them.
If I rebrew it I'll probably use the dry English yeast WL007, or a neutral, higher attenuating one to see how the balance changes.

 

[JonM]

I gotta say I'm intrigued by this recipe. If I ever get around to doing it, I think I'll just plug the numbers into a recipe calculator and adjust as necessary - reduce the crystal, increase the efficiency, adjust the hopping, do a standard mash, and ferment with 002 at no more than 64.

 

[bigdaddybrew]

That's a good plan trying both yeasts. I am making my own adjustments.

I have a mild case of OCD so I start by evening the measurements, Haha I can't help it.

I buy 1 ounce packages of hops so 1 oz of Columbus for 20 minutes, 1 oz of Ahtanum for 10 min and 1 oz Ahtanum for whirlpool hops about 38 IBUs in Beersmith.

Long boil probably important to the flavor stay at 90 minutes.

Warmer fermentation is probably a flavor aroma clue so I'll use Safale S-04 dry yeast. I'll keep it under 70f. Cheaper, easy to use, finishes pretty dry and flocculates quickly.

Mash at 152 for 60 minutes. I like my beer to finish drier.

Still think it's weird they released a recipe with what appear to be errors. Could this be the original less bitter Homebrewed version that inspired the founding of Stone Brewing?

Or just a quick brewers conversion from commercial size batches?

 

[BreezyBrew]

Stone Brewing has released their Pale ale recipe for homebrewers but something is off...

http://blog.stonebrewing.com/index.php/stone-pale-ale-recipe/

I entered it into Beersmith and got some weird results...

65% efficiency to hit 1.057? Maybe I should e-mail them some tips to boost their efficiency.

Stone says the Pale is 50 IBUs but Beersmith says 29 IBUs with this hop schedule.

Stone's website says Magnum and Ahtanum but the recipe uses Columbus and Ahtanum. With a 90 minute boil maybe it makes no difference?

WLP007 or WLP002? Not exactly interchangeable in my brew book with about 10% difference in attentuation.

Mash at 156f for 20 minutes? Who mashes for 20 minutes?

Mashing at 156F with more than a pound and a half of crystal malt? Good luck hitting a final gravity of 1.014 especially using WLP002.

Ferment at 72f? With the pressure in a giant commercial fermenter suppressing the esters it might be good but with 5 gallons I think it might be too fruity?

What is going on here? Any thoughts?

I posted about this too: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f14/stone-retiring-pale-ale-releases-recipe-519014/

Well, I think a lot of what is going on here has to do with commercial brewing vs. Hombrewing.

Commercial brewers buy hops in bulk, so depending on availability and cost, their recipies change from time to time. Their systems are much larger and are going to act differently then our homebrew setups.

I wouldn't doubt that a 20 min mash was effective for them... there's lots of experiments around here that show the mash reaches full conversion long before the industry standard of 60 minutes.

Stone uses a house yeast that is most similar to 007 and secondly 002. Their house yeast is probably more attenuative then either strains. They more than likely have a yeast lab where they can selectively choose which attributes of the yeast they like best.

They are able to get away with fermenting at 72 because of the size of their huge conicals. They put a ton of pressure on the yeast and suppress ester formation. I'd think their 72 is more like our 68 or lower.

As for all that crystal in there... I have not a very good explanation for that one. I think the short mash may have something to do with it though.

 

[bigdaddybrew]

I may try a 20 minute mash some time. I would love to shave 40 minutes off my brew day. Maybe a mini batch to test it. One gallon or so.

The hop schedule being off on the IBUs is especially strange to me.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

It's a PLOY!

Stone wants you to brew this beer and have it be horrible so that when they revive it on a limited release it will sell out.

Mwahahahahahahahahaha.

 

[Psylocide]

I may try a 20 minute mash some time. I would love to shave 40 minutes off my brew day. Maybe a mini batch to test it. One gallon or so.

The hop schedule being off on the IBUs is especially strange to me.

Just did a 5 gal wheat 30 min mash... thread's coming.

76% efficiency, haven't checked FG yet... that will be the true test. Kegging this weekend.

 

[BreezyBrew]

Really good info on mash time here: https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f14/30-min-vs-60-min-mash-infusion-vs-step-mash-350374/index2.html

 

[Lynchy217]

Stone Brewing has released their Pale ale recipe for homebrewers but something is off...

http://blog.stonebrewing.com/index.php/stone-pale-ale-recipe/

I entered it into Beersmith and got some weird results...

65% efficiency to hit 1.057?

...

Mash at 156f for 20 minutes? Who mashes for 20 minutes?

Well the shorter Mash time could account for the poor efficiency.. The real question, though is how they get that kind of attenuation out of the yeast.. even with 004..

 

[philipCT]

Scooping the foop isn't that unusual. Kal at the electricberwery.com talks about it. I don't do it religiously, cause I'm not sure what the value is supposed to be, and I'm a lazy SOB.

The most interesting thing in this recipe is:

• Pitch rate 16 to 18

If you read other recipes posted by the Stone brewers, they also specify pitch rates. A lot of homebrewing texts simply say to pitch "enough" yeast. I understand it's probably easier for a pro brewer who doubtless has an in-house lab to tell them exactly what their cell density is to control pitch rates this carefully.

But what made me notice this is that on my last several beers, I've attained substantially more attenuation than predicted by Wyeast or BeerSmith. So while I hit my OG dead-on, my FG came out lower than expected, leading to a higher than expected ABV. Not a huge problem, except I am really trying to brew true to these recipes now.

This is likely due to my practice of making substantial starters - nothing crazy - just substantial. For example, if BrewersFriend calls for 230Bn cells, I'll round up a bit on the starter to something like 1.5L and come out with a reading of 270Bn. So I'm not massively overpitching, and I figure it's all ballpark anyway.

But now I'm wondering, should I try to manage the pitch rate more carefully?

 

[Psylocide]

Well the shorter Mash time could account for the poor efficiency.. The real question, though is how they get that kind of attenuation out of the yeast.. even with 004..

I disagree.

76% on 30 min mash. I think efficiency has a heck of a lot more to do with the grain crush than the amount of time mashed.

 

[beachy]

This is the same recipe provided in the book " The Craft Of Stone Brewing Co " released four years ago.
It explains in the book that the beer started as a home brew recipe and with this much crystal it is not a typical pale ale but that was the way they liked the beer and it has never been changed from the origional recipe.
In the book it tells the story of the APA and gives the recipe. Later in the book it explains that Arrogant Bastard was actually APA (the APA ?) incorrectly scaled to suit a new brewing system which resulted in a big malty/bitter beer. While the brewers liked the beer they did not think their customers would so the recipe was put aside and not brewed for several years until Stone Arrogant Bastard was eventually released using that incorrect recipe.

I know there has been a huge thread dedicated to cloning AB but from reading this book is it possible that the AB hops are columbus/ahtanum rather than chinook and the crystal malt is this 13% 60/75L combo rather than the darker 120L etc ?

 

[BreezyBrew]

Thanks for the info! Had no idea.

 

[bigdaddybrew]

Just did a 5 gal wheat 30 min mash... thread's coming.

76% efficiency, haven't checked FG yet... that will be the true test. Kegging this weekend.

How did that 30 min mash work out? FG?

 

[Psylocide]

How did that 30 min mash work out? FG?

75% efficiency, ~80% attenuation. OG was 1.052, FG was 1.010.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f244/30-min-mash-success-519602/

 

[Zepth]

Slight thread revival. Updated Link.

I brewed up a beer based rather closely on this recipe. I went with a 30 minute mash as I've had success with that in the past, omitted the Crystal 75 because I wasn't making a dedicated trip for it, and used US-05 at my usual 18C. It turned out to be great, and was one of the most complimented beers I have ever made. Sadly I have never had the actual one from Stone, nor will I ever have the chance. Great? Yes. The same? We shall never know.